The Provenance of Ecumenius' Commentary On the Apocalypse

1998 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 88-108
Author(s):  
John C. Lamoreaux

AbstractThe earliest extant Greek commentary on the Apocalypse was written by a certain Ecumenius. Many questions surround the provenance of this commentary. Was it written early in the sixth century or does it rather stem from the later decades of that same century? Was it written by a Monophysite? or by a Chalcedonian? Was the author of this commentary a friend and ally of Severus of Antioch? If not, who then was he? Such questions are important because Ecumenius' commentary is important. It offers an early uncial text of the Apocalypse of great moment for the New Testament textual critic. It is a significant source for understanding late antique efforts to support the canonical authority of the Apocalypse.' It contains crucial evidence of developing Mariological doctrines. Even more interesting, however, is the commentary's place in the history of polemic against Origen. Such themes are subtle, yet so frequent that one could read the text primarily as an attempt to provide an eschatological vision orthodox enough to replace that of Origen and his followers. But these are matters for another time.2 Here our concern is that of establishing the provenance of this text-who wrote it? when? and where?

2021 ◽  
pp. 135-154
Author(s):  
Gilles Dorival

Catenae appeared in Judaea/Palestine at the beginning of the sixth century. They consist of commentaries, homilies, scholia of the past centuries, and any other literary form in which Scripture verses are explained. Ecclesiastical writings are quoted in the form of extracts, sometimes literal, sometimes rewritten, according to the order of the verses of each Biblical book. Each extract is normally preceded by the name of its author in the genitive case. With time, the catenae were formed not only from commentaries, homilies, scholia, and other patristic writings, but also from pre-existing catenae mixed with these sources. After the sixth century, catenae became the most important media of biblical commentary until the end of the Byzantium Empire (1453). Many debated issues remain. Is Procopius of Gaza (470–530) the father of the catenae? Maybe the two-author catenae predate him, even if this form is better connected with the Byzantine humanism of the ninth and tenth centuries. As for the multiple-author catenae, it is not certain if any of them do are prior Procopius. The compilers of the catenae began their project with the Old Testament, as it was considered to be obscure and foundational to the New Testament, whereas the New Testament was considered to be clear and explicative of the Old Testament. The identity of the compilers of the catenae is shrouded in mystery. Only a few names are known: chiefly, Procopius of Gaza in Palestine and Nicetas of Heraclea in Constantinople. Other names have been proposed: the patriarch Photius, Peter of Laodicea, John Drougarios, but without any persuasive arguments. A final issue concerns Monophysite (or Miaphysite) catenae: were some catenae Monophysite? Or was this literary form indifferent to questions of orthodoxy? In some catenae, Severus of Antioch is called ‘saint’, which may indicate a Monophysite origin. Finally, despite recent progress, many catenae still await publication. For instance, Nicetas’ catena on the Psalms is a monumental work of Byzantine scholarship and it deserves to be available to modern readers.


1991 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 259-275
Author(s):  
L. D. Jacobs

The textual criticism of the New Testament (1): The current methodological Situation This first article in a two-part series on the textual criticism of the New Testament focuses on the current state of affairs regarding textcritical methodology. Majority text methods and the two main streams of eclecticism, viz moderate and rigorous eclecticism, as well as statistical methods and the use of conjectural emendation, are reviewed with regard to their views on method as well as the history of the text. The purpose is to arrive at a workable solution which the keen and often not so able textual critic, translator and exegete can use in his handling of the Greek text of the New Testament.


2011 ◽  
Vol 45 (2/3) ◽  
Author(s):  
H.F. Van Rooy

The messianic interpretation of the psalms in a number of Antiochene and East Syriac psalm commentariesThe Antiochene exegetes interpreted the psalms against the backdrop of the history of Israel. They reconstructed a historical setting for each psalm. They reacted against the allegorical interpretation of the Alexandrian School that frequently interpreted the psalms from the context of the New Testament. This article investigates the messianic interpretation of Psalms 2 and 110, as well as the interpretation of Psalm 22, frequently regarded as messianic in non-Antiochene circles. The interpretation of these psalms in the commentaries of Diodore of Tarsus, Theodore of Mopsuestia and Išô`dâdh of Merv will be discussed, as well as the commentary of Denha-Gregorius, an abbreviated Syriac version of the commentary of Theodore. The commentaries of Diodore and Theodore on Psalm 110 are not available. The interpretation of this psalm in the Syriac commentary discussed by Vandenhoff and the commentary of Išô`dâdh of Merv, both following Antiochene exegesis, will be used for this psalm. The historical setting of the psalms is used as hermeneutical key for the interpretation of all these psalms. All the detail in a psalm is interpreted against this background, whether messianic or not. Theodore followed Diodore and expanded on him. Denha-Gregorius is an abbreviated version of Theodore, supplemented with data from the Syriac. Išô`dâdh of Merv used Theodore as his primary source, but with the same kind of supplementary data from the Syriac.


Author(s):  
Д.К. АСРАТЯН

Письма патриарха Константинопольского Николая Мистика архиепископу Аланскому Петру – основной документальный источник по истории христианства на Северном Кавказе в X в. Изучение «Аланского досье» патриарха Николая сохраняет актуальность в связи с ростом интереса к духовной истории народов Кавказа, находившихся на стыке цивилизаций, религий и культур и сформировавших под их влиянием собственные самобытные национально-культурные традиции. Основным методом исследования стало сопоставление лексических и семантических средств, используемых апостолом Павлом и патриархом Николаем в двух различных, но соотносимых исторических и религиозных контекстах. Цель исследования – выявление жанровых и литературных связей писем патриарха с книгами Нового Завета. Научная новизна заключается в обосновании лингвистических, семантических и богословских параллелей между письмами Николая и посланиями апостола Павла, особенно пастырскими (1-2 Тим и Тит). Хотя сравниваемые тексты хронологически разделены почти тысячелетием, отмечается типологическое сходство исторических контекстов, в которых они были написаны (духовный наставник – ученик в епископском сане – молодая христианская община из «варваров», нуждающихся в просвещении). В интерпретации Николая миссия – это именно тяжкий труд, но совершаемый по прямому повелению Бога и ради награды свыше, и в этом смысле патриарх вполне укоренен в новозаветной традиции. Как показали результаты исследования, риторическая и богословская насыщенность писем Николая Мистика не снижает их историческую ценность, однако для корректной интерпретации необходимо учитывать их литературный характер. Letters of Nicholas Mysticus, Patriarch of Constantinople, to Peter, Archbishop of Alania, remain the chief documentary source for the history of Christianity in the North Caucasus in the 10th century. The study of the "Alan Dossier" of Patriarch Nicholas remains relevant due to the growing interest in the spiritual history of the peoples of the Caucasus, who lived at the crossroads of civilizations, religions and cultures and formed their own distinctive national and cultural traditions under such diverse influence. The main research method was the comparison of lexical and semantic means used by the Apostle Paul and Patriarch Nicholas in two different, but correlated historical and religious contexts. The purpose of the study is to identify genre and literary connections between the letters of the Patriarch and the books of the New Testament. Scientific novelty lies in the substantiation of the linguistic, semantic and theological parallels between the letters of Nicholas and the letters of the Apostle Paul, especially the pastoral ones (1-2 Tim and Titus). Although the compared texts are chronologically separated by almost a millennium, there is a typological similarity in the historical contexts in which they were written (a spiritual mentor - a bishop student - a newly formed Christian community of “barbarians” in need of education). In the interpretation of Nicholas, mission is a hard work, but it is done at the direct command of the God and is rewarded from above, and in this sense, the Patriarch is completely rooted in the New Testament tradition. As the results of the study have shown, the rhetorical and theological richness of the letters of Nikolas the Mysticus does not diminish their historical value, yet for correct interpretation it is necessary to take into account their literary character.


Author(s):  
STEFANUS KRISTIANTO

Secara garis besar, buku ini terdiri atas enam bab utama. Bab pertama merupakan bagian pengantar yang menyentuh tiga aspek penting. Pertama, bab ini memberi pengenalan awal tentang apa itu CBGM. Secara ringkas, Wasserman dan Gurry mendefinisikan CBGM sebagai “a method that (1) uses a set of cumputer tools (2) based in a new way of relating manuscript texts that is (3) designed to help us understand the origin and history of the New Testament text.” (hal. 3). Jadi, seperti harapan Epp, metode ini mengkombinasikan penggunaan komputer dan pendekatan kuantitatif di beberapa bagian. Wasserman dan Gurry kemudian menggaris bawahi bahwa hal baru yang ditawarkan CBGM ialah bagaimana cara metode ini menghubungkan teks antar naskah. Pendekatan ini menggunakan prinsip dasar bahwa teks antar naskah bisa saling dihubungkan dengan menggunakan hubungan antar variannya. Kedua, bab ini juga menjelaskan secara singkat lima perubahan yang dibawa CBGM. Selain perubahan teks kritikal Yunani di beberapa tempat, CBGM juga menyebabkan munculnya ketidakpastian mengenai teks awal (initial text) di beberapa tempat. Bukan hanya itu, CBGM ternyata juga mendorong penolakan terhadap kategori tipe teks (atau kluster teks menurut Epp), meningkatnya apresiasi terhadap teks Byzantine, dan berubahnya tujuan utama Kritik Teks (meski sangat tipis). Bab ini kemudian ditutup dengan pembahasan aspek ketiga, yakni alasan mengapa buku ini ditulis. Sederhananya, buku ini ditulis untuk mereka yang optimis terhadap potensi CBGM (tetapi tidak mengerti bagaimana menggunakannya) dan juga mereka yang cenderung negatif terhadap CBGM. Buku ini diharapkan menjadi penolong kedua kelompk tersebut memahami CBGM lebih baik.


Author(s):  
Hans J. Lundager Jensen

On the basis of examples of attitudes towards foreigners in the Old Testament, the internal tension between a tendency to eliminate the differences between Israel and foreigners and an insistence on maintaining the fundamental distance between Israel and foreigners, even in eschatological perspective, is presented. The a priori assumption of the Israelitic understanding of themselves is not a differentiation between nature and culture (between non-human and the human), but between the human in general and the specifically Israelitic. This difference cannot be transgressed without the break-down of the Israelitic system. Identity is understood here as establishing differences. But the dialectic between the Old Testament beginnings which are negated by the history of Israel, continues in the New Testament which negates the history of Israel and yet which allows the Old Testament to remain as an equal part of the canon. The practical universalism (modernism) of the Western world and the eradication of ethnic differences is thereby partly anticipated as a problematic in the Christian canon and partly given an important corrective.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document