Online edition and Russian translation of Severian of Gabala, In illud: Secundum imaginem et similitudinem (Gen. 1, 26), CPG 4234

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Russian scholar Sergey Kim has made a critical edition and Russian translation of Severian of Gabala’s In illud: Secundum imaginem et similitudinem (Gen. 1, 26), CPG 4234, “In the image and likeness (of God)”.  It’s a pity that this isn’t in a more mainstream language, but one can hardly complain that a Russian scholar writes in Russian!  Anyway I expect that Google Translate will help.

It’s here.  Grab it while it’s hot!

From the (English) abstract at the end:

Severianus Gabalensis. In illud: Secundum imaginem et similitudinem (Gen. 1, 26), CPG 4234 / Introduction, еditio princeps, Russian translation by S. S. Kim.

Readers are offered a first part of the study of the sermon “On the image and the likeness” of Severian, Bishop of Gabala (died after 408). In the introductory article the A. sets out a survey of previous studies, gives an overview of manuscripts and evidence of the indirect tradition.

There are solid arguments for atributing the homily to Severian of Gabala, which are divided into three groups — arguments of external, content and stylistic nature. The A. formulates a hypothesis about the reasons for the exclusion the sermon “On the image and the likeness” from the Severian’s cycle “In Hexaemeron.”

For the first time the ancient Greek text of the sermon (editio princeps) and its Russian translation are published. The publication and translation are accompanied by indications to parallels from other authentic works of Severian of Gabala, devoted to the theme of the creation of the world.

Keywords: Severian of Gabala, on the creation of the world, homiletics, edition of texts, patrology.

Share

“Parabalani” – an early order of male nurses? or Cyril’s “goon squad”?

Posted on by Roger Pearse

The Watts book, City and School in late antique Athens and Alexandria, continues to offer interesting passages.  It’s a book to be read for the text, rather than the footnotes, although there are plenty of these.

We take up the story in Alexandria, after the murder of Hypatia in 415 by a gang of thugs acting under the direction of Cyril of Alexandria.  Orestes is the prefect.

From page 200:

The events immediately following Hypatia’s death are not clear. Orestes and the city councilors who had been working with Hypatia were obviously shocked by the murder. Lacking the lynch pin that held their party together, their opposition seems to have fallen apart. It has been suggested by C. Haas that Orestes had himself transferred after the attack. [187] This may be right. At any rate, he is not heard from again. It seems, however, that the Alexandrian council had become alarmed enough at the bishop’s conduct to send an embassy to Constantinople. This embassy apparently led to the passage of a law placing the parabalani, Cyril’s notorious goon squad, under the control of the prefect.[188] But it was only two years before this law was overturned and Cyril regained control of their ranks.[189] By the early 420s, Cyril had come to dominate the Alexandrian council completely. And the murder of Hypatia represented the turning point that led to this victory.

Although the killing of Hypatia had eliminated any effective opposition to Cyril’s regime, the brutality of the act soiled Cyril’s reputation for a long time. …

188. For this law see C. Th. 16.2.42.
189. Haas, Alexandria in Late Antiquity, 314-15.

But who or what are the parabalani?

We find out from a law preserved in the Theodosian code 16.2.43:

Parabolani, qui ad curanda debilium aegra corpora deputantur...

The parabolani, who are deputed to care for the suffering bodies of the sick…

There are in fact only three mentions of this group in antiquity.  Everything we know about them must be derived from this slender data base.  Fortunately we can quote them all here.

The first two are both in the Theodosian Code.  In fact there are two laws,16.2.42 and 43.  Here is the Pharr translation of both:

42. The same Augustuses to Monaxius, Praetorian Prefect.

Whereas, among other useless claims of the Alexandrian delegation,[122] this request also was written in their decrees, that the Most Reverend bishop should not allow certain persons [123] to depart from the City of Alexandria, and this claim was inserted in the petition of the delegation because of the terror of those who are called attendants of the sick,[124] (Quia inter cetera Alexandrinae legationis inutilia hoc etiam decretis scribtum est, ut reverentissimus episcopus de Alexandrina civitate aliquas . .. non exire, quod quidem terrore eorum, qui parabalani nuncupantur, legationi insertum est) it is the pleasure of Our Clemency that clerics shall have nothing to do with public affairs and with matters pertaining to the municipal council.

1. We further direct that the number of those who are called attendants of the sick[124] shall not be more than five hundred. Moreover, the wealthy and those who would purchase this office shall not be appointed, but the poor from the guilds, in proportion to the population of Alexandria, after their names have been submitted, of course, to the Respectable Augustal Prefect and through him referred to Your Magnificence.

2. We do not grant to the aforesaid attendants of the sick[124] liberty to attend any public spectacle whatever or to enter the meeting place of a municipal council, or a courtroom, unless, perchance, they should appeal to a judge separately in connection with their own cases and interests, when they sue someone in litigation or when they are themselves sued by another, or when they are syndics[125] appointed in a cause common to the entire group. The condition shall be observed that if anyone of them should violate the foregoing provisions, he shall be removed from the registers of the attendants of the sick and shall be subjected to due punishment, and he shall never return to the same office.

3. Furthermore, We grant to the Respectable Augustal Prefect the power to appoint successors to the deceased attendants of the sick, under the condition that is designated above.

Given on the third day before the kalends of October at Constantinople in the year of the seventh consulship of Theodosius Augustus and the consulship of Palladius. [September 29 (October 5), 416.][126]

122. Embodied in their petition to the Emperor, as stated in the decrees of their municipal council, 12, 12, n. 3.
123. M. suggests a lacuna; his emended text would read: should not allow from the City of Alexandria any . . . not to depart. As to the claim that was inserted in the petition of the delegation, because of the terror of those who are called attendants of the sick it is the pleasure of Our Clemency.
124. parabalani. See Du Cange, s.v. parabolani. Because of the nature of their work these clerics were possessed of a reckless disregard for personal danger. They were often religious fanatics and espoused the cause of the poor and oppressed. Thus they were potential sources of sedition, and the provisions of this law were designed to restrain them, 9, 40, 16; 16, 3, 1, n. 2.
125.  Legal representatives, official advocates.
126. 12, 12, 15.

The next law, from 418, two years later, also relates to the parabalani:

43. The same Augustuses to Monaxius, Praetorian Prefect.

We formerly directed that there should be five hundred attendants of the sick, who are assigned to care for the suffering bodies of the sick. But since We have learned that this number is insufficient at present, We command that six hundred instead of five hundred shall be established as the number. Thus, according to the judgment of the Most Reverend Bishop of the City of Alexandria, there shall be chosen for such responsibility six hundred attendants of the sick from among those who had been attendants formerly and who are experienced in the practice of healing, excluding, of course, dignitaries and decurions. Moreover, if anyone of the aforesaid attendants should be removed by the common lot of man, another shall be chosen in his place, according to the will of the aforesaid priest, excluding dignitaries and decurions. Thus, these six hundred men shall be subservient to the commands and regulations of the most reverend priest and shall continue under his supervision. The rest of the provisions included in the general rule of the law formerly issued with respect to the aforesaid attendants of the sick and their attendance at public spectacles and courts and all other matters, shall be observed, as has already been decreed.

Given on the third day before the nones of February at Constantinople in the year of the twelfth consulship of Honorius Augustus and the eighth consulship of Theodosius Augustus. [February 3, 418.]

We should note that both laws also appear in the legal Code of Justinian (529 AD), book 1, title 3 (de episcop.); 17, which is an abbreviated version of the first, and 18, which is the second.  Both are online here.  May we perhaps infer that the group still existed at that date?[1]

The third reference is in the minutes of the Council of Chalcedon, in 451 AD.  The minutes are discussing events at the “robber council” of 449 in Ephesus.  Cyril had been succeeded by Dioscorus as bishop of Alexandria.  As often happens, a wily and unscrupulous man who knew how to use violence for political ends was followed by a disciple of less political acuteness, and even greater violence.  Dioscorus intimidated the  bishops, and got what he wanted.  But within a year the emperor Theodosius II was dead; his successor Marcian was hostile; and at Chalcedon retribution was in the air. Here is the Liverpool University translation of the passage in the Acts, p.269.[2]

851. While this was being read, Basil the most devout bishop of Seleucia in Isauria said: ‘I do not need other witnesses. Through the blessed Bishop John, I asked my declaration to be corrected, because I feared you, most devout Dioscorus; for you then applied great pressure on us, partly external and partly in what you said. Armed soldiers burst into the church, and there were arrayed Barsaumas and his monks, parabalani, and a great miscellaneous mob. Let everyone testify on oath, let the Egyptian bishop Auxonius testify on oath, let Athanasius testify on oath, if I did not say, “No, lord, do not destroy the good repute of the whole world.”’

852. Dioscorus the most devout bishop of Alexandria said: ‘Did I coerce you?’

853. Basil the most devout bishop of Seleucia in Isauria said: ‘Yes, you drove us to such a murderous crime by means of the threats of the mob after the deposition of the blessed Flavian. From the way he is now disrupting the whole council you can guess what force he applied then, when he had control of everything, including the sentence. Six of them[312] are left, and yet he can throw us all into disarray.’

854. Dioscorus the most devout bishop of Alexandria said: ‘My notary Demetrianus is ready to prove that you asked him secretly to alter your statement.’

855. Basil the most devout bishop of Seleucia in Isauria said: ‘I ask your magnificence that each of the metropolitan bishops, those of Lycaonia, Phrygia, Perge and the others, come here and affirm on the gospels if, after the deposition of the blessed Flavian, when we were all downcast, some of us not daring to raise our voices and others slipping away, he did not rise up and stand on high, while he declared, “Look! If anyone refuses to sign, he has me to reckon with.” Let the lord Eusebius [of Ancyra] testify on oath if he did not run the risk of being deposed because he delayed his sentence for a short time.’

312. The reference appears to be to six attendants in Dioscorus’ suite.

The delicious description of the brutal Dioscorus as “most devout” is a mere piece of ecclesiasticism, like the use of words like “venerable”, and “reverend”, applied to clergy who are not necessarily either.

What do we learn from these three passages?

We learn that the parabalani were established to care for the sick. The first law (416 AD) shows that it was a designated “office”, which some might consider worth purchasing (so presumably in receipt of money or other benefits); but that in fact they were creating a “terror”, by invading theatres, councils and court-rooms.  It places them under the control of the city prefect, and limits their numbers. The second law (418 AD) places them back completely under the control of the bishop; namely good old, bad old Cyril of Alexandria.  The third account (449 AD) shows them being used for intimidation of council proceedings at the direction of the new bishop of Alexandria.

“Goon squad” seems an apposite name for the band.

Let’s finish with a few other bits of data, themselves not very indicative of anything.

The Greek word used in the Acts of Chalcedon is παραβαλανεῖς, which literally means bath-attendants. Sometimes it is given as παραβολᾶνοι, those who disregard their lives, as in attending those with communicable diseases.[3]

Joseph Bingham in Origenes Ecclesiasticae, 1834, reads the law 42 above as suggesting that the parabalani were clergy; because of the ban on clergy meddling in city administration.  However this is not necessarily the case.  The ban may refer to Cyril, not to the parabalani.

There is an article on the subject in the Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium 2, p.1582.  This references two modern articles, both accessible online if you have JSTOR access.  But neither adds very much.[4]

It is really hard to like Cyril of Alexandria.  The mystery is why anybody would consider such a man a saint.

Share
  1. [1]Wikipedia claims that a further law is found in the Code of Justinian, 1.2.4, but this is in error.  The title reads: The Same, to Nicenus, Praetorian Prefect. Let no more than nine hundred and fifty canons be appointed for the Church of this great City, and let no one have the power to add to their number, or to change it, or to substitute others for those who may die; and let none of those of this body who exceed the abovementioned number and have been appointed through patronage, and have been denied the right of innovation, claim those things which have been bestowed upon the Holy Church by way of honor, or as necessary privileges. Given at Eudoxiopolis, on the seventh of the Kalends of September, during the Consulate of Honorius, Consul for the eighth time, and Theodosius Junior, Consul for the third time, 409.↩
  2. [2]Joseph Bingham in Origenes Ecclesiasticae, Or, The Antiquities of the Christian Church, 1834, vol.. 1, p.302, gives the reference as “Con. Chalced. Act. i. tom. iv. p.252”.  Translation from The Acts of the Council of Chalcedon, vol. 1, translated by Richard Price and Michael Gaddis, 2005.  Translated Texts for Historians 45.↩
  3. [3]Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium 2, p.1582, where the former is preferred.↩
  4. [4]A. Philipsborn, “La compagnie d’ambulanciers ‘parabalani’ d’Alexandrie”, Byzantion 20 (1950), 185-90. JSTOR.  W. Schubart, “Parabalani”, Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 40 (1954), 97-101.  JSTOR.↩

Hello Windows 7 my old friend, I’ve come to talk with you again

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Yesterday I wrote about my frustration with Windows 10.  Twice in the last few weeks, I have brought my laptop to my hotel room, in order to do a few items for an hour; and then been prevented from doing so, by an unwanted and unstoppable “upgrade” which locked out the machine all evening.  I update very regularly, so these events are deeply intrusive.

I’ve taken the plunge and rolled my travelling laptop back to Windows 7.  It’s not easy, but it is doable.

What I call my “travelling laptop” is not my main machine, the loss of which would be a serious blow.  Instead it is a very plastic, very cheap Acer Aspire 5552, which I bought for £200 quite a few years ago.  It was bought because I could afford to lose it.  But it turned out to be a little gem.  Some years ago I replaced the hard drive with a solid-state disk of the same capacity, copying the disk like-for-like.  This speeded it up, and it runs perfectly.

Like many laptops, it has a hidden partition, on which the factory supplied software hides.  So I knew that I could revert to the factory version.  This, of course, was Windows 7.

I must say that I am deeply impressed with Acer.  When I installed Windows 10, it wrote all over the MBR – the main boot record, which controls startup, and which Acer altered so that you could call up the recovery partition.  That was very cavalier of Microsoft.  But Acer had thought of this.  You could still revert to factory setting, using the Acer eRecovery software, still installed on the ordinary disk.  This is what I did.

First I copied the files that I wanted to an external drive.  There weren’t that many.  It’s not my main machine, after all.

Then I fired up eRecovery, and told it to erase the C: drive and restore to factory settings.  It rebooted fairly soon, and I could see at once that the MBR had been restored.  The option to hit F2 to enter the BIOS – erased by Windows 10 – had reappeared.  This was a good sign!

Quite a bit of groaning later, and Windows 7 reappeared.  I went through the initial config, and there it was!

But of course I wasn’t done.  Firstly I had to get rid of the awful MacAfee software which manufacturers burden us with.  I had to download the tool to get rid of it too – many an unwary person has run the “uninstall” – which doesn’t actually get rid of parts of it – and ended up running two anti-virus packages at the same time.  This reduces the speed to a crawl.

Secondly, I ran Windows Update.  This only brought up a few minor updates, to my surprise; until a box popped up, informing me that the version of Windows 7 was obsolete.  Of course – I needed to upgrade to Service Pack 1 (SP1).  A link was provided!

The Microsoft link took me … to a Microsoft page that barely functioned.  I was very unimpressed.  You would only visit this page if you had an ancient version of Windows with an ancient version of Internet Explorer (in my case version 8).  But the page didn’t work with that.  Attempting to install IE11 brought me the curt message that this wasn’t supported on Win7 without SP1.

In the end I gave up, and installed Chrome.  This installed beautifully, and didn’t mess me around.  Well done Google.

Then I got hold of the SP1 installer, not without trouble – rubbish website, Microsoft, rubbish website.  I ran it, it worked, I reran Windows Update and … I have 187 updates to install.  Um.

It’s rather late now, and it was a long day, so I shall do those in batches tomorrow.

But I really am impressed with Acer.  They saved my bacon.  I’m fairly impressed with Google Chrome, who didn’t cause me trouble.

It’s funny to see Windows 7 again.  It looks old-fashioned now.  Such is the power of fashion and design, that something that once looked very modern now looks out of date!

All the same, I am glad to see it again!

Share

Raging against the … Windows?

Posted on by Roger Pearse

This evening I’m in a hotel, as so often.  I turned on my travelling laptop.  I wanted to download Edward J. Watts, City and School in Late Antique Athens and Alexandria, from Academia.edu, in order to OCR it and make the PDF searchable.

But something was wrong.  The machine kept stuttering.  Eventually I got the file; and set it to OCR.  And then, to my horror, a message appeared on-screen: Windows10 has silently and without my permission downloaded a huge “update” – now I understand the stuttering – and is now going to install it.

That was almost two hours ago now.  These precious minutes, in which I could have done things, all gone.  Microsoft decided their needs took precedence.  On my computer.

This is the second time in a few weeks that I have been locked out of my own computer by an arrogant US corporation.

I carry a laptop around with me so that I can work in the evening if need be.  This pattern of activity means that I can’t be sure that the laptop will be available to use.  Which defeats the whole purpose of having it.

I’ve had enough.  This is too much.  I am going to revert my travelling laptop to Windows 7, where at least I got a voice in whether downloads happened.  I gather the key is on a sticker on the underside of the machine, and media can be downloaded.  But it will cost me some hours of nuisance.

Infuriating. But it is intolerable to be prevented from using the machine.

Share

Fun with footnotes again – a sentence suggesting Christian villainy, and the text of the reference

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Yesterday’s post, investigating a paragraph on Dirk Rohmann’s book, drew some comment on the last sentence:

In John [Chrysostom]’s metaphorical words, the apostles have “gagged the tongues of the philosophers and stitched shut the mouths of the rhetoricians.” This passage echoes a similar statement in an unpublished manuscript (attributed to John) which asserts that “the senate decrees have been overthrown, the philosophers and orators have been put to shame, and the Areopagus has been wiped out.” This statement could be right because it is attested that in the last quarter of the fourth century large private mansions were constructed on the Areopagus hill, traditionally a place that housed archives.[13]

[13] Watts (2006), 80–81. – Watts, Edward J. 2006. City and School in Late Antique Athens and Alexandria. Berkeley: University of California Press.

I had in fact intended to look into this myself.  The sentence suggested to me that the meaning was as follows:

  •  The rise of Christianity in the empire led to the destruction of pagan literature and written documents of all sorts.
  •  The Christians destroyed the Areopagus and the archives kept there.
  •  We know this because large private houses were built there at the end of the fourth century.

But in fact we learn that Dr R had no such intention, and the sentence was merely intended to offer evidence for the abandonment of the Areopagus by that date.

However the reference given is Watts’ City and School in Late Antique Athens and Alexandria.  And … there is a preview of this online, including pages 80-81!  [Update: in fact the whole book is online at Academia.edu here!]

Watts seems like a rather good book, which I would very much like to read!  He tells us that Athens was sacked by the Herulian barbarians in 267.  This ruined the fortunes of the leading citizens, who were unable to repair public buildings.  But by the late 4th century things were recovering, and a period of opulence ensued.

The section that concerns us is as follows:

To understand the challenges faced by Plutarch’s school, one must first explore the economic and religious changes Athens underwent in the later fourth and fifth centuries. Both archeological and epigraphic sources indicate that, contrary to the trend of the previous century, relatively widespread prosperity took hold among the Athenian upper classes in the later fourth century. The most striking evidence for the new wealth of the city comes from the ruins of a number of large houses constructed in the mid- to late fourth century on sites scattered throughout the city.1 The remains of the most elaborate of these houses were found grouped together on the north slope of the Areopagus hill. Dating from the last quarter of the fourth century, these houses were extraordinary in both their size and their layout.2 At a time when the average Athenian house occupied something in the neighborhood of 130-150 square meters, the Areopagus houses ranged in size from 1000 to 1350 square meters.3 These large houses had distinctive architectural features (like apsidal rooms)4 and elaborate interior decorations such as were common to urban and suburban villas of the time.5 Broad upper-class prosperity is seen from the remains of other Athenian buildings as well. These include the massive Palace of the Giants in the Agora,5 an elaborately decorated complex of buildings and enclosed gardens that occupied over 13,500 square meters of space,7 and public construction of a stoa complex containing a mysterious round building.8

Epigraphic evidence from the later fourth and early fifth centuries tells a similar story. Inscriptions describing the efforts of private individuals to pay for the physical rehabilitation of the city begin to appear in the mid-fourth century. In the later fourth century, a new gateway to the Acropolis was constructed.9 Similarly, private funding paid for the renovation of the theater of Dionysus, the erection of a sundial, and the carving of a set of honorary statues to a prefect responsible for renovating the Library of Hadrian.10 The inscriptions mark some of the men responsible for these projects as teachers, but it seems best to see this public spending less as an indication of the wealth of teachers and more as proof of the general prosperity of the period.

The source of this activity is particularly interesting because many of the people responsible for this renewed public euergetism were demonstrably pagan. Traces of this can be seen in several well-known public inscriptions. One such inscription honors the prefect Herculius. It marks him as a defender of the city whose image rests beside that of Athena.11 Another inscription records civicly sanctioned honors for Dexippus, who is “dear to the gods.”12 These references ought not be taken as mere rhetorical convention. Wealthy Athenians in the late fourth and early fifth centuries worked hard both to maintain the vitality of pagan worship in their city and to demonstrate this vitality publicly. On May 27, 387, a man of senatorial rank named Musonius celebrated a taurobolium, an initiatory rite that culminated in a very public acclamation of the devotee’s piety, and displayed an inscribed commemoration of this act.13 Another (undated) taurobolium memorial also survives from this period.14 As was the case with taurobolia commemorations in fourth-century Italy, these monuments were intended to preserve the memory of specific public acts of pagan religious self-expression.15 Less exotic public manifestations of pagan devotion also occurred. Wealthy pagans continued to pay for the Panathenaiac procession16 and, through their influence, the Athenian temples remained intact until the middle of the fifth century.17

Given the general decline of city councils in the fourth-century Roman East, the vigor shown by the Athenian councilor class is remarkable.18 Indeed, its vitality is particularly notable because this Athenian recovery occurred despite the fact that most historically prominent families had been devastated by the Herulian attack. It seems, however, that this activity was due as much to a sense of pagan civic patriotism as to a re-emergence of economic power among Athenian city councilors. Simply put, fifth-century pagans valued Athenian civic institutions and were willing to assume certain extraordinary burdens to keep them viable. There was a reason for this. At a time when imperial and provincial administrators were pursuing policies largely favorable to Christianity, the city council could serve as a governing organ that preserved certain features of pagan civic life. Possibly because of this continued relevance, participation in civic government remained a source of pride to Athenian pagans. Civic office in general and the archonship in particular remained an important achievement in one’s political career, even in the later fifth century,19 and evidence suggests that the archonship was an office that was often tied to prominence in the pagan community.20 Beyond simply valuing the office, Athenian pagans also respected the continuity of the institution. In some cases, pagans even continued to mark each year with the name of the eponymous archon, a deliberate contrast to the system of dating employed by the Christian court.21

Well that’s very interesting.  Indeed I have to force myself to stop quoting at that point, because it’s all fascinating, and very readable.

This gives a different picture.  The houses are not being built by Christians intent on erasing the pagan past; they’re being built by pagans on the town council intent on preserving and enhancing it.

Likewise there is no mention of archives, although I had certainly thought (evidently wrongly) that this was the point of the comment.  I was unable to find any mention of archives on the hill of the Areopagus anywhere.  The state archives were kept in a nearby temple, of the Mother of the Gods, the Metroon, as far as I am aware.  I am entirely ignorant here, of course.

Watts tells us that the city was so badly damaged by the Herulians that the buildings around the agora were not rebuilt, but used as a garbage dump; and that leading Athenian families from the 2nd and 3rd centuries disappear.  Did any such archives perish then, rather than in the late 4th century?

Interesting to see how the author’s intention comes across quite differently to the reader!

Share

From my diary

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Earning a living is consuming all my time at the moment, so blogging is slow.  But a couple of things are going on.

Good news: I have started a new commission, this time for a translation of another Byzantine vita of St Nicholas of Myra.  I have hopes that this will be out by Christmas.  The translator has many calls on his time, however, so this may be slow.

I also need to chase up a commission for Eusebius of Caesarea’s Commentary on Luke.  It’s basically done, but not polished off.  I just haven’t had time to breathe to attend to it.

None of my own stuff is progressing, for lack of time.  My current contract lasts until new year; if they don’t renew me – which of course I hope they will! – then I will be able to get back to interesting stuff then.

My planned trip to Rome last weekend was cancelled because of the illness of the person I was going with.  The insurance company is absorbing some of my time, sadly.

I have another blog post on footnotes almost done, which will doubtless appear in a few days.  I can’t get on with Eutychius until I have more time.

Share

Fun with footnotes – the Laudatio Apostolorum of ps.Chrysostom

Posted on by Roger Pearse

I do enjoy looking into footnotes.  I’ve been looking into another couple on a passage in Dirk Rohmann’s book, which we encountered a few days ago.  (I’m ignoring footnotes that I’m not looking at; but giving the context).

In John [Chrysostom]’s metaphorical words, the apostles have “gagged the tongues of the philosophers and stitched shut the mouths of the rhetoricians.” This passage echoes a similar statement in an unpublished manuscript (attributed to John) which asserts that “the senate decrees have been overthrown, the philosophers and orators have been put to shame, and the Areopagus has been wiped out.”[12] This statement could be right because it is attested that in the last quarter of the fourth century large private mansions were constructed on the Areopagus hill, traditionally a place that housed archives.

[12] Voicu (1997), 515: “Senatsbeschlüsse sind von den Aposteln umgestürzt, Philosophen u. Redner  beschämt u. der Areopag vernichtet worden”, referring to the unpublished manuscript Cod. Vat.  Gr. 455 fol. 119v. (Voicu, Sever J. 1997. “Johannes Chrysostomus II (Pseudo-Chrysostomica).” RAC 18:503–15)

Mmmm… unpublished manuscripts!!!

…the senate decrees have been overthrown, the philosophers and orators have been put to shame, and the Areopagus has been wiped out…

That does sound rather interesting.  I wondered what the context is?  What is this “unpublished manuscript”?  So… I thought I’d see what I could find!

The RAC seems to be the Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum which no normal person has access to.  It’s not accessible online.  That’s annoying.  Presumably nobody ever looks at it.

My next thought was that perhaps the manuscript itself was online?  Maybe I could take a look at it?  Maybe get a text transcribed, or translated?  After all, 15,000 Vatican manuscripts are now online.  But unfortunately this is not one of them.  Okay…

But surely the Pinakes database, maintained by the IRHT, will list the manuscript and it’s contents?  Well indeed they do!  The entry is here.  The manuscript appears to be a Byzantine homiliary, of the 10th century, and the passage comes from a very short work (folios 118v-120v), entitled Laudatio SS Apostolorum (= Praise of the holy apostles), CPG 4970 (BHG 0160i), incipit Οἱ πρὸ τῆς κλήσεως ἁλιεῖς καὶ μετὰ τὴν κλῆσιν πάλιν ἁλιεῖς, and ending ὅτι ἔδει ἐξ ὕψους μεγάλαις ταῖς πτέρυξιν ἐφιπτάμενον τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα φίλους θεοῦ καὶ προφήτας κατασκευάζειν… ἀμήν.  Three manuscripts are listed – Thank heavens for the thoroughness of the IRHT cataloguers!  The CPG entry tells us no more; a couple of items of inaccessible bibliography are listed by the BHG.  A google search reveals another article by Sever J. Voicu, likewise inaccessible.[1]  I infer that the work does indeed have some interesting features!

We can do nothing with this work at the moment.  It’s quite unusual, these days, that I can’t find some kind of access online to some of this stuff.  But of course this was once normal.  It’s a reminder of what is still offline.

But once the manuscript comes online at the Vatican site, I must have a look.  If the manuscript is legible – and Greek manuscripts tend to be heavily abbreviated – then I might try to get a transcription made; and then a translation.  It might be fun!

There is nothing we can do at the moment, however.  Nice footnote, to nice stuff.

Share
  1. [1]S.J.Voicu, “Echi costantinopolitani di sant’Ireneo. Note su una pseudocrisostomica «Laudatio apostolorum» (CPG 4970)”, in Ultra Terminum Vagari. Scritti in onore di Carl Nylander, a cura di B. Magnusson, S. Renzetti, P. Vian & S.J. Voicu, Roma: Edizioni Quasar. Associazione Internazionale di Archeologia Classica, 1997, 357-366.↩

Another Coptic text from Anthony Alcock – the martyrdom of Apatil

Posted on by Roger Pearse

It’s here:

Share

Some photographs of seats in the Hippodrome of Istanbul from 1950

Posted on by Roger Pearse

The Hippodrome of Constantinople remains a splendid place, even in modern Istanbul.  But I was unaware that in 1950 a Turkish archaeologist excavated on the west side of the hippodrome, and uncovered some of the seats.  This week I came across some photographs from the excavations online, here, here and here.  So I thought that I would share them with you!  (I gather from Wikipedia that further digging outside the Sultan Ahmet mosque in the 90’s uncovered more material, but this I know nothing about).  We must all be grateful to those who located and placed these photos online.

Also online I discovered photographs of two column capitals, today in the Istanbul museum.  It must have been really splendid!

Share

Hunting the wild misquotation again: the perils for the author of not verifying your quotations

Posted on by Roger Pearse

A week or so ago I saw on Twitter a quotation attributed to John Chrysostom, which read as follows:

Chrysostom liked to gloat that the apostles had gagged the tongues of the philosophers and stitched shut the mouths of the rhetoricians.

The author of the tweet was a certain Catherine Nixey, who is an arts journalist for the Times of London.  She has a book out claiming that the Christians deliberately destroyed almost all ancient literature, or some illiterate nonsense like that.

The tweet appeared in a thread which began here like this:

Patrick Walsh‏ @Walsh_e_Patrick Sep 7
Did Christians erase classical wisdom? Stunning advance copies of THE DARKENING AGE by Catherine Nixey just in – publication 21st September

I’m not sure who Patrick Walsh is, but he seems to post announcements of book launches.  Anyway this one met with criticism, and @catherinenixey joined in in response.  She then posted our tweet above.  (The link to her tweet is here; but there is now no purpose in clicking that link, as we shall see.)  I happened to see it; and responded.  Screen grabs are below!

As I always do, I wondered whether John Chrysostom did say this, and if so, in what context.  So I needed a source.  As I went along, I replied to Nixey, starting here:

Her response was to brush my results aside and demand I follow her so that she could talk to me by direct message.  She did this a couple of times.

And then… suddenly she deleted her account.  This I discovered when I logged in, intending to write to her.

Then I messaged George Morley, who seems to be her publisher, asking why her account had vanished.  I saw no reply.  So I can only infer that her publisher got windy about how things were going, and told her to stop tweeting fast.

Rather than peering at those screen grabs, let me lay out what I saw.

A google search quickly revealed her source.  This proved to be Dirk Rohmann’s Christianity, Book-Burning and Censorship in Late Antiquity, De Gruyter (2016), Google Books preview page 207 (actually p.202 in the printed book):

Name-checking Pythagorean philosophy, John [Chrysostom] justifies the obliteration of ancient philosophies by the beginning of the Gospel of John, implying that the word (lógos) of God is absolute and unchallenged: “Has not all that with good cause perished and been utterly obliterated? – Indeed with good cause and according to the Word!”⁹ In his Demonstration against the Jews and Pagans John demonstrates Jesus’ divinity as a corollary of the success of Christianisation and the subsequent dissolution of the ancient traditions.¹⁰ This, he suggests, is because the apostles were given power over the demons. In John’s metaphorical words, the apostles have “gagged the tongues of the philosophers and stitched shut the mouths of the rhetoricians.”¹¹ This passage echoes a similar statement in an unpublished manuscript (attributed to John) which asserts that “the senate decrees have been overthrown, the philosophers and orators have been put to shame, and the Areopagus has been wiped out.”¹² This statement could be right because it is attested that in the last quarter of the fourth century large private mansions were constructed on the Areopagus hill, traditionally a place that housed archives.¹³

So there is not much question about where Nixey got her idea of Chrysostom gloating over the destruction of pagan literature.  Footnote 11 supplies the reference:

11. Chrys. Jud. et gent. 5.3 (PG 48:820): φιλοσόφων ἐπιστομίζειν γλῶσσαν, ῤητόρων ἀποῤῥάπτειν στόματα.

This is Chrysostom, Against the Jews and Pagans, a little known work.  Certainly these words say what Nixey said – they gagged the tongues of the philosophers, they stitched shut the mouths of the rhetoricians.

But that quote gives no context.  What we need is an English translation.  I learned from the bibliography at Fourth Century that one does exist, in Fathers of the Church 73, Chrysostom Apologist, p.210-11.  So here is, not just six words, but the whole of chapter 5.  It is not long.

Chapter 5
The Mission of the Apostles Foretold

(1) After these events, he would send forth his apostles, as Isaiah had foretold. “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace, of those who bring glad tidings of good things,”‘ he said. Look what part of the body he praised. He lauded their feet, which took them everywhere they went. Furthermore, David showed the manner and source of their strength and success when he said: “The Lord shall give the word to them who preach the good tidings with great power.”

(2) It would not be by wielding weapons, nor by expenditure of money, nor by strength of body, nor by abundance of armies, nor by any other such means that the apostles would conquer the world. They would gain victory by a mere word, since that word had great power and was proved by signs and wonders. For they preached Christ crucified, they wrought miracles and. in this way, they conquered the world. It was on this account that David said: “The Lord shall give the word to them who preach the good tidings with great power,”‘ because this was his way of speaking of the miracles and wonders they worked.

(3) And it was the result of an ineffable power that the fisherman, the publican, and the tent maker, at their mere commands, raised the dead to life, drove out demons, drove off death, stopped the tongues of philosophers, stitched shut the mouths of rhetoricians, overcame kings and rulers, and were victorious over barbarians, pagans, and every nation.

(4) Indeed, David described the situation well in that way. For it was by that word which God gave them that they accomplished all those things they did. And it was with God’s great power that they brought the dead back to life, changed sinners into just men, restored sight to the blind, and drove out disease from the body and evil from the soul. And where did they get that power? That it came from the Holy Spirit is made quite clear from these words: “And they were filled with the Spirit,”’ and both men and women prophesied.

(5) Tongues seen in the form of fire settled on each one of them, as Joel had long before predicted when he said: “I shall pour out a portion of my spirit on all flesh, and your sons will prophesy and your daughters will see visions, and your young men will dream dreams before the coming of the great and illustrious day of the Lord.” [By “the great and illustrious day” he meant both the day of the Spirit and the day which would come at the consummation of the world.] This same prophet predicted salvation through faith—for he did not remain silent on this—when he said: “And it will be that whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved

Surely this is just a preacher, going through the events of Acts?  Nothing more.  How is this innocent retelling of the Acts, of the doings of Peter, Paul, and friends, a call for book-burning, fire and sword?  What sort of person would read this like that?

Anyway I posted the screen grab, and asked Catherine Nixey whether she felt that her “quote”, verbally accurate though it was, was a fair representation of what Chrysostom wrote.

Her response was to delete her account.  And that makes me feel rather guilty.  I hope that I did not do her harm.

One final thought.  In view of the attempt to erase the discussion, probably by the publisher, here is a screen grab demonstrating that the @catherinenixey account did indeed exist.  It’s not much; but I am unaccustomed to this kind of thing, so I did not capture her comments.

Does anyone know how to see deleted tweets?

Share