Euthalian Traditions: Text, Translation and Commentary 9783110291964, 9783110291797

Table of contents :
Preface
Part One. Introductory Issues
I. Introductory Issues
1. Introduction
1.1. What is the ‘Euthalian Apparatus’?
1.2. Manuscript Evidence and Editions
2. History of Research
2.1. Survey
2.2. Conclusions
3. Aim and Structure of the Study
3.1. The Euthalian Apparatus and the Biblical Text
3.2. The Sequence and Style of the Present Commentary
3.3. Themes of the Commentary
3.3.1. The Pre-text
3.3.2. The Meta-terminology of the Apparatus
3.3.3. The Apparatus as Paraphrase
3.3.4. Parallel Materials
Part Two. Text and Translation
II. The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι
Κεφάλαια
Ὑποθέσεις
Πρόλογοι
Part Three. Commentary
III. Commentary
1. Commentary on the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι
1.1. The Genre κεφάλαια-τίτλοι
1.2. The Structure of the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι
1.3. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the Division of the Pre-text
1.4. The meta-terminology of the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι
1.4.1. ΠΑΡΑΙΝΕΣΙΣ
1.4.2. ΠΑΡΑΚΛΗΣΙΣ
1.4.3. ΕΥΧΑΡΙΣΤΙΑ
1.4.4. ΕΥΧΗ
1.4.5. ΕΠΑΝΑΛΗΨΙΣ
1.5. The meta-terminology of the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι : Concluding Remarks
1.6. Transformations and Additions to the Pre-text
1.7. The ‘Paulusbild’ of the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι
2. Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις
2.1. The Genre Υποθεσις
2.2. The Hypotheses of the Pauline Letters
2.2.1. Authorship
2.2.2. Structure
2.2.3. Διὰ τί: An Ancient Introduction to the Ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline Letters
2.2.4. Hypothesis of Romans
2.2.5. Hypothesis of 1 Corinthians
2.2.6. Hypothesis of 2 Corinthians
2.2.7. Hypothesis of Galatians
2.2.8. Hypothesis of Ephesians
2.2.10. Hypothesis of Colossians
2.2.11. Hypothesis of 1 Thessalonians
2.2.12. Hypothesis of 2 Thessalonians
2.2.13. Hypothesis of Hebrews
2.2.14. Hypothesis 1 Timothy
2.2.15. Hypothesis of 2 Timothy
2.2.16. Hypothesis of Titus
2.2.17. Hypothesis of Philemon
2.2.18. The Hypotheses of the Pauline Letters: Summary
2.3. The Hypotheses of the Catholic Letters
2.3.1. Authorship
2.3.2. Structure
2.3.3. Hypothesis of James
2.3.4. Hypothesis of 1 Peter
2.3.5. Hypothesis of 2 Peter
2.3.6. Hypothesis of 1 John
2.3.7. Hypothesis of 2 John
2.3.8. Hypothesis of 3 John
2.3.9. Hypothesis of Jude
2.3.10. The Hypotheses of the Catholic Letters: Summary
2.4. Hypothesis of Acts
2.5. The List of Apostles and Deacons
2.6. The List of Wonders
2.7. The Hypotheses: Summary
3. Commentary on the Prologues
3.1. The Genre ‘Prologue’
3.2. Commentary on the Prologue to the Letters of Paul
3.2.1. Structure of the Prologue to the Letters of Paul
3.2.2. The Heading to the Prologue to the Letters of Paul
3.2.3. Prologus praeter rem
3.2.3.1. The Genre ‘Prooemium’
3.2.3.2. Comments on the ‘Prooemium’
3.2.4. Prologus ante rem
3.2.4.1. The ‘Life of Paul’
3.2.4.2. The ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters’
3.2.4.3. The ‘Editorial Notice’
3.2.4.4. The ‘Chronicle of the Preaching of Paul’
3.2.5. Prologue to the Letters of Paul: Summary
3.3. Commentary on the Prologue to the Catholic Letters
3.3.1. Structure of the Prologue to the Catholic Letters
3.3.2. The Heading to the Prologue to the Catholic Letters
3.3.3. Prologus praeter rem
3.3.3.1. Comments on the ‘Prooemium’
3.3.4. Prologus ante rem
3.3.4.1. Comments on the ‘Editorial Notice’
3.3.5. The Prologue to the Catholic letters: Summary
3.4. Commentary on the Prologue to Acts
3.4.1. Structure of the Prologue to Acts
3.4.2. The Heading to the Prologue to Acts
3.4.3. Prologus praeter rem
3.4.3.1. Comments on the ‘Prooemium’
3.4.3.2. The ‘Encomium of Melete’
3.4.4. Prologus ante rem
3.4.4.1. Comments on the ‘Editorial Notice’
3.4.4.2. Comments on the ‘Epitome of Acts’
3.4.5. Prologue to Acts: Summary
3.5. The Prologues: Summary
Part Four. Résumé
IV. Resume
1. Introduction
2. Aim of the Present Commentary
3. The Meta-terminology of the Euthalian Apparatus
4. The ‘Paulusbild’
5. The Catholic Letters in the Euthalian Apparatus
6. Acts in the Euthalian Apparatus
7. The Composition of the Euthalian Editions
8. The Ancient and Medieval Parallel Materials in Relation to the Euthalian apparatus
9. Comparison of the Parallel Materials
Part Five. Appendices
V. Appendix I
1. ‘Marcionite’ Prologues
2. Edition of Priscillian
3. Theodoret’s Arguments
4. Theophylact’s Arguments
VI. Appendix II
1. What is a Genre-Designation?
2. Parainesis – paraineo – parainetikos as Genre-Designation
2.1. A short History of parainesis as Genre-Designation
2.2. The Evidence from Euthalius
2.2.1. Evidence from the Chapter-Lists (CAP)
2.2.2. Evidence from the Affiliated Argumenta
2.3. Evidence From Ps-Libanios or Ps-Proclos
3. Conclusion
Bibliography
Index of Modern Authors
Index of Passages

Citation preview

Vemund Blomkvist Euthalian Traditions

Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur Archiv für die Ausgabe der Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhunderte

(TU) Begründet von O. von Gebhardt und A. von Harnack Herausgegeben im Auftrag der Berlin-Brandenburgischen Akademie der Wissenschaften von Christoph Markschies Band 170

De Gruyter

Vemund Blomkvist

Euthalian Traditions Text, Translation and Commentary

Including the Appendix Parainesis as an Ancient Genre-Designation by David Hellholm and Vemund Blomkvist

De Gruyter

Dieser Band wurde im Rahmen der gemeinsamen Forschungsförderung im Akademienprogramm mit Mitteln des Bundesministeriums für Forschung und der Senatsverwaltung für Wirtschaft, Technologie und Forschung des Landes Berlin erarbeitet.

Gutachter dieses Bandes: Hans-Gebhard Bethge und Christoph Markschies Vemund Blomkvist. Born 1967. Dr. Philos. Senior Lecturer in Greek and New Testament Isagogics at the Faculty of Theology, University of Oslo. This publication has been supported by the Research Council of Norway.

ISBN 978-3-11-029179-7 e-ISBN 978-3-11-029196-4 ISSN 0082-3589 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress. Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.dnb.de abrufbar. 쑔 2012 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Layout and typesetting: Progressus Consultant AB in Karlstad, Sweden Druck: Hubert & Co. GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ⬁ Gedruckt auf säurefreiem Papier Printed in Germany www.degruyter.com

Contents Preface ................................................................................................................xi Part One

Introductory Issues I. Introductory Issues ........................................................................................3 1. Introduction ..............................................................................................3 1.1. What is the ‘Euthalian Apparatus’? ................................................3 1.2. Manuscript Evidence and Editions................................................5 2. History of Research ..................................................................................8 2.1. Survey ................................................................................................8 2.2. Conclusions ....................................................................................31 3. Aim and Structure of the Study............................................................33 3.1. The Euthalian Apparatus and the Biblical Text ..........................33 3.2. The Sequence and Style of the Present Commentary ...............34 3.3. Themes of the Commentary .........................................................36 3.3.1. The Pre-text ............................................................................36 3.3.2. The Meta-terminology of the Apparatus ............................36 3.3.3. The Apparatus as Paraphrase ...............................................40 3.3.4. Parallel Materials ...................................................................42 Part Two

Text and Translation II. The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι ..............................45

vi

Contents

Κεφάλαια .....................................................................................................45 Ὑποθέσεις ....................................................................................................73 Πρόλογοι .....................................................................................................99 Part Three

Commentary III. Commentary............................................................................................121 1. Commentary on the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι ...............................................121 1.1. The Genre κεφάλαιον-τίτλος .....................................................121 1.2. The Structure of the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι......................123 1.3. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the Division of the Pre-text............124 1.4. The meta-terminology of the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι ......125 1.4.1. ΠΑΡΑΙΝΕΣΙΣ ......................................................................125 1.4.2. ΠΑΡΑΚΛΗΣΙΣ ....................................................................129 1.4.3. ΕΥΧΑΡΙΣΤΙΑ.......................................................................130 1.4.4. ΕΥΧΗ ....................................................................................134 1.4.5. ΕΠΑΝΑΛΗΨΙΣ ...................................................................136 1.5. The meta-terminology of the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι: Concluding Remarks ................................................................................................138 1.6. Transformations and Additions to the Pre-text .......................139 1.7. The ‘Paulusbild’ of the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι....................................140 2. Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις ..........................................................142 2.1. The Genre Υποθεσις ....................................................................142 2.2. The Hypotheses of the Pauline Letters ......................................147 2.2.1. Authorship ............................................................................147 2.2.2. Structure ...............................................................................147

Contents

vii

2.2.3. Διὰ τί: An Ancient Introduction to the Ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline Letters ................................................................................147 2.2.4. Hypothesis of Romans ........................................................148 2.2.5. Hypothesis of 1 Corinthians ..............................................154 2.2.6. Hypothesis of 2 Corinthians ..............................................157 2.2.7. Hypothesis of Galatians ......................................................160 2.2.8. Hypothesis of Ephesians .....................................................161 2.2.10. Hypothesis of Colossians..................................................165 2.2.11. Hypothesis of 1 Thessalonians .........................................167 2.2.12. Hypothesis of 2 Thessalonians .........................................168 2.2.13. Hypothesis of Hebrews .....................................................170 2.2.14. Hypothesis 1 Timothy.......................................................171 2.2.15. Hypothesis of 2 Timothy ..................................................172 2.2.16. Hypothesis of Titus ...........................................................172 2.2.17. Hypothesis of Philemon ...................................................173 2.2.18. The Hypotheses of the Pauline Letters: Summary ........174 2.3. The Hypotheses of the Catholic Letters ....................................176 2.3.1. Authorship ............................................................................176 2.3.2. Structure ...............................................................................176 2.3.3. Hypothesis of James ............................................................178 2.3.4. Hypothesis of 1 Peter ..........................................................179 2.3.5. Hypothesis of 2 Peter ..........................................................182 2.3.6. Hypothesis of 1 John ...........................................................183 2.3.7. Hypothesis of 2 John ...........................................................185 2.3.8. Hypothesis of 3 John ...........................................................186 2.3.9. Hypothesis of Jude ...............................................................186 2.3.10. The Hypotheses of the Catholic Letters: Summary.......188

viii

Contents

2.5. The List of Apostles and Deacons ..............................................192 2.6. The List of Wonders .....................................................................192 2.7. The Hypotheses: Summary .........................................................193 3. Commentary on the Prologues ..........................................................194 3.1. The Genre ‘Prologue’ ...................................................................194 3.2. Commentary on the Prologue to the Letters of Paul ............... 196 3.2.1. Structure of the Prologue to the Letters of Paul ............... 196 3.2.2. The Heading to the Prologue to the Letters of Paul ......... 197 3.2.3. Prologus praeter rem ...........................................................197 3.2.3.1. The Genre ‘Prooemium’ .............................................197 3.2.3.2. Comments on the ‘Prooemium’ ................................198 3.2.4. Prologus ante rem ................................................................200 3.2.4.1. The ‘Life of Paul’ ..........................................................200 3.2.4.2. The ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters’ .........................206 3.2.4.3. The ‘Editorial Notice’ ..................................................211 3.2.4.4. The ‘Chronicle of the Preaching of Paul’ ..................213 3.2.5. Prologue to the Letters of Paul: Summary .........................216 3.3. Commentary on the Prologue to the Catholic Letters ............. 218 3.3.1. Structure of the Prologue to the Catholic Letters ............. 218 3.3.2. The Heading to the Prologue to the Catholic Letters ....... 218 3.3.3. Prologus praeter rem ...........................................................218 3.3.3.1. Comments on the ‘Prooemium’ ................................218 3.3.4. Prologus ante rem ................................................................219 3.3.4.1. Comments on the ‘Editorial Notice’ .........................219 3.3.5. The Prologue to the Catholic letters: Summary...............220 3.4. Commentary on the Prologue to Acts ...................................... 220

Contents

ix

3.4.1. Structure of the Prologue to Acts ...................................... 220 3.4.2. The Heading to the Prologue to Acts ................................ 221 3.4.3. Prologus praeter rem ...........................................................221 3.4.3.1. Comments on the ‘Prooemium’ ................................221 3.4.3.2. The ‘Encomium of Melete’ .........................................223 3.4.4. Prologus ante rem ................................................................224 3.4.4.1. Comments on the ‘Editorial Notice’ .........................224 3.4.4.2. Comments on the ‘Epitome of Acts’ .........................225 3.4.5. Prologue to Acts: Summary ...............................................226 3.5. The Prologues: Summary ...........................................................226 Part Four

Résumé IV. Résumé......................................................................................................231 1. Introduction ..........................................................................................231 2. Aim of the Present Commentary .......................................................232 3. The Meta-terminology of the Euthalian Apparatus.........................233 4. The ‘Paulusbild’.....................................................................................235 5. The Catholic Letters in the Euthalian Apparatus .............................240 6. Acts in the Euthalian Apparatus.........................................................241 7. The Composition of the Euthalian Editions .....................................242 8. The Ancient and Medieval Parallel Materials in Relation to the Euthalian apparatus ......................................................................................244 9. Comparison of the Parallel Materials ................................................246

x

Contents

Part Five

Appendices V. Appendix I .................................................................................................253 1. ‘Marcionite’ Prologues .........................................................................253 2. Edition of Priscillian ............................................................................255 3. Theodoret’s Arguments .......................................................................269 4. Theophylact’s Arguments ....................................................................286 VI. Appendix II ..............................................................................................299 1. What is a Genre-Designation? ...........................................................299 2. Parainesis — paraineo — parainetikos as Genre-Designation ........302 2.1. A short History of parainesis as Genre-Designation ...............302 2.2. The Evidence from Euthalius .....................................................304 2.2.1. Evidence from the Chapter-Lists (CAP) ..........................305 2.2.2. Evidence from the Affiliated Argumenta .........................336 2.3. Evidence From Ps-Libanios or Ps-Proclos ...............................340 3. Conclusion ............................................................................................343 Bibliography ...................................................................................................345 Index of Modern Authors ............................................................................377 Index of Passages ...........................................................................................383

Preface Many people have contributed to this study. First, I am deeply grateful for the countless hours Professor David Hellholm has guided me with exceptional knowledge and strong support during my work on this dissertation. Berit Hellholm, Prof. David Hellholm’s wife, has generously supported my work and served some memorable dinners. Christer Hellholm, their son, has done excellent work with typesetting and editing. I would also like to thank Cristina Hellholm, Christer Hellholm’s wife for her hospitality. Bjørg Tosterud gave me valuable advice on the translation. Andrey Sand, David Jourdan, and Dr. Stephen Kidd helped me improve the English style. Dr. Simon Crisp inspired me with his enthusiasm, and Dr. Louis Charles Willard generously gave me access to his notes. I also had the pleasure to discuss the Euthalian matter with the late Professor Neville Birdsall when I was a guest at the meeting of Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas in Pretoria, South Africa in 1999. I also want to express my gratitude to the late Professor Nils Alstrup Dahl, who introduced me to the Euthalian apparatus in 1994. The University of Oslo and the Faculty of Theology gave me the opportunity to work on this dissertation. I want to thank Professor emeritus Jerker Blomqvist and Professor Dieter Sänger for accepting the task of being opponents at the defence of my thesis. Their criticism was very valuable. Professor Øyvind Norderval was the administrator of the committee, and I want to thank him for helpful advice and support. Finally, I wish to extend my gratitude to Professor Christoph Markschies, editor of Texte und Untersuchungen, who accepted this study for publication in this renowned series. I am, of course, responsible for all errors in this work. The essay by David Hellholm and Vemund Blomkvist, “Parainesis as an Ancient GenreDesignation. The Case of the ‘Euthalian Apparatus’ and the ‘Affiliated Argumenta’” first published in J. Starr and T. Engberg-Pedersen (eds.), Early Christian Paraenesis in Context
#;/8



#FSMJO
t
/FX
:PSL
8BMUFS
EF
(SVZUFS

o
IBT
JO
TMJHIUMZ
revised and supplemented form been reprinted in this volume as VI. Appendix II.

Part One Introductory Issues

I. Introductory Issues 1. Introduction 1.1. What is the ‘Euthalian Apparatus’? The Acts, the Pauline letters, and the Catholic letters are epitomized in a corpus that is known as the ‘Euthalian apparatus’, (hereafter called the ‘apparatus.’) The apparatus has been transmitted without a title in the majority of manuscripts, but its common designation derives from ‘Euthalius,’ a person about whom very little is known. Some writers believe he was an Egyptian cleric who lived in the 4th or 5th century,1 while others place him much later, describing him as a deacon from the East who became bishop of Sulci in Sardinia in the 7th century.2 The name ‘Euthalius’, however, is not the only one which appears in the manuscripts, but also ‘Evagrius,’ who has been identified both with Evagrius Ponticus3 and Evagrius of Antioch,4 both of the 4th century. The apparatus originally appeared in two volumes: 1. The first volume contained the fourteen letters of Paul, with Heb placed after 2 Thess.5 2. The second volume contained Acts together with the seven Catholic letters. These two volumes are described in the so-called Euthalian prologues—although the term ‘prologue’ is in a sense unfortunate, since the ‘prologues’ were probably something closer in form to dedicatory letters.6 These letters once accompanied the Euthalian volumes, which should be considered model codices for the Euthalian editions, although these codices themselves are no longer extant. The first volume was thus an edition of the Pauline letters and the second volume an edition of Acts and the Catholic letters. Although it may be objected that the use of the term ‘edition’ applied to manuscripts is anachronistic, the terminology adopted in the present work will reflect the stance repre1

L. Zacagni

MYJJoMYW
BOE
J. Wettstein (1752: 73) place him in the 5th century, while F. C. Conybeare

o
QMBDFT
IJN
JO
UIF
th century.

2

This identification was first suggested by Herm. von Soden

o
BOE
MBUFS
TVQQPSUFE
CZ
W. Bousset

o 

3

See A. Ehrhard 1891.

4

See J. N. Birdsall 1970.

5

See the heading to the Prologue to the Pauline Letters: Πρόλογος Εὐθαλίου διακόνου προτασσόμενος τῆς βίβλου τῶν ἐπιστολῶν Παύλου τοῦ ἀποστόλου. ‘Prologue by the Deacon Euthalius prefixed to the Book of the Letters of Paul the Apostle.’ This is called ‘The Apostolic Book’ in the Prooemium of the Prologue to Acts.

6

See J. R. Harris 1893: 82; G. Zuntz 1953: 19.

4

Introductory Issues

sented by Elizabeth Eisenstein, who notes that biblical scholars often refer to ‘editions of the Bible’ made before the age of printing.7 Each of the prologues contains an editorial notice where the volumes are described. It should however be remembered that no two identical manuscripts exist, and from the very moment a copy is made, the ‘first edition’ is subject to change. Apart from changes in the text, entire sections that were added as help for readers may be omitted, and new material added. The great variety found in Euthalian manuscripts shows that this has occurred.8 For this reason, it is important to emphasize that the Euthalian editions did not survive in their original form since both the arrangement of the biblical text and the introductory material have been subject to change. Regarding the arrangement of the biblical text, it is commonly assumed that the Euthalian editions were written in senselines,9 even though this is not the case with the great majority of extant manuscripts. The justification for referring to editions is therefore not a uniformity found in the textual tradition, but a hypothetical starting point behind that tradition. The editions were probably not planned as a two-volume work, since the first volume does not announce any sequel. In the prologue to the second volume there are, however, references to the first. Thus we may speak of two Euthalian editions that later were combined into one.10 All scholars have presupposed that the two volumes were the work of one author, who incorporated earlier material into his editions. The voice of this author is presumably heard in the prologues. However, the possibility exists that the second volume was calqued onto the first, and that the author of the second consciously wrote the prologues to Acts and the Catholic letters in the style of his predecessor. If this is the case, the question of authorship is even more complex than scholars often have assumed. To this question we will return in the commentary below. The original editions with the Euthalian prologues were not the starting point for the entire tradition of auxiliary material that exists in Greek manuscripts of the NT. Much of this material existed prior to the apparatus, and has also been transmitted through other channels. Thus we find the same texts transmitted together with the prologues and without them. This was emphasized by Albert Ehrhard, and also by Nils Alstrup Dahl.11 To begin, it is necessary to offer some preliminary comments on the most important elements of the apparatus: 1. Κεφάλαια-τίτλοι (chapter titles).12 The biblical text was early divided into chapters, each with its own title. Κεφάλαια-τίτλοι are often prefixed to each biblical book, and the titles may be repeated in the biblical text. 7

See E. Eisenstein 1979/2005: 11.

8

See the great variety of constellations in L. Ch. Willard

o
o 

9

See Zacagni 1698: lix; Wettstein 1752: 73; Zuntz

o
BOE
Willard

o
o

10

This is the case eg in minuscule 181, which contains Acts, the Catholic and the Pauline letters and the Apocalypse.

11

See Ehrhard 1891: 397; N. A. Dahl
E
o

12

This term is not ancient, but was invented by von Soden. The manuscripts use the term κεφάλαια. In the present study von Soden’s term is adopted, as it has a more precise reference. See von Soden 1902: 405.

Introduction

5

2. Ὑποθέσεις (argumenta). The ὑποθέσεις are separate summaries for each biblical book. 3. Πρόλογοι (prologues).There are three prologues (to the Pauline letters, to Acts, and to the Catholic letters). The prologues explain that the author has been asked to edit the biblical books, and they provide introductory material of interest to the reader, such as biographies of the biblical authors and short summaries of their work.

1.2. Manuscript Evidence and Editions Elements belonging to the apparatus are found in hundreds of Greek biblical manuscripts. A survey of the Greek manuscripts and the elements of the apparatus they contain was made by Louis Charles Willard.13 His survey shows that only a limited number of manuscripts have been used in the printed editions of the apparatus. The first printed edition of the entire apparatus is that of Lorenzo Zacagni, published in Rome in 1698, in the first (and only) volume of his Collectanea monumentorum veterum ecclesiae Graecae ac Latinae. Zacagni used nine manuscripts, his most important witness being minuscule 181.14 This eleventh-century manuscript contains Acts, the Catholic letters, the Pauline letters, and the Apocalypse, in that order (since the Apocalypse is not transmitted with the Euthalian apparatus, it will not be considered here). The text of the original manuscript ends at Tit 2:3, and the Apocalypse was supplemented later.15 Minuscule 181 contains the three Euthalian prologues, with the ὑποθέσεις and κεφάλαια-τίτλοι prefixed to each biblical book, as well as lists of biblical quotations and other auxiliary material. Through the edition of Zacagni, this manuscript has had a great influence on later scholarship. Therefore, the name ‘Euthalius,’ which occurs in this manuscript, was established as the name of the author, despite the fact that the apparatus in the majority of manuscripts is anonymous. The edition of Zacagni forms the basis of the editions of Andreas Galland (1774), Jacques Paul Migne (1864), and Hermann von Soden (1902). The earliest witness that contains Euthalian material is Codex H 015 of the Pauline letters (6th cent.).16 This fragmentary manuscript is written in sense-lines. The sense-lines are quite short, some of them consisting only of a single word. This manuscript contains several elements of the apparatus, (even though it does not have any prologue), including (1) Lists with numbered κεφάλαια; (2) numerals in the margin which indicates where a chapter begins;17 (3) a numbering of the OT quotations in the margin with indication of the source of the quotation;18 and (4) a colophon with phrases that are very close to mate13

See the manuscript survey in Willard

o
o 

14

Zacagni refers to this as the ‘Codex Regio-Alexandrinus Vaticanus’, as it was donated by Queen Christina to Pope Alexander VIII, see Zacagni 1698: liv.

15

See von Soden 1902: 219.

16

See the edition of Codex H by H. Omont (1890) and the material reproduced by J. A. Robinson (1895: o 

17

These can only be seen in a few intances, see Ehrhard 1891: 394.

18

On the OT testimonies in Codex H, see Robinson

o

6

Introductory Issues

rial found in the apparatus. This colophon is reproduced in the following section dealing with the history of research. Although the history of the apparatus is primarily linked to the history and reception of the Greek New Testament, some other versions do exist. Euthalian material exists in Syriac, Armenian and Georgian, as well as traces of the apparatus in Gothic and Latin. The apparatus for the Pauline letters was translated into Syriac. The first scholar to offer a comprehensive treatment of the Syriac version was Ernst von Dobschütz (1899), who based his study on two NT manuscripts, L (8th cent.) and O (11th cent.).19 L contains the Peshitta version, while O represents the Harclean revision. The apparatus is used differently in these two manuscripts: in L, it was added as an independent tract to the NT, while in O the apparatus was inserted into the biblical text, as in the Greek tradition.20 The two versions of the apparatus are not independent, but are evidence of a complex history of transmission.21 The apparatus for the Pauline letters, Acts and the Catholic letters was translated into Armenian. This material was introduced to European scholars by Frederick Cornwallis Conybeare in 1895, whose work on this material was carried further by James Armitage Robinson in his Euthaliana. These scholars studied the Armenian manuscripts with the apparatus from the 13th century22 although the Armenian translation of the apparatus itself is much older, (dating perhaps to the 5th century, as Conybeare argued).23 In the 1920s, P. Aristaces Vardanian wrote a series of articles on the Armenian version of the apparatus which were later published together in one volume.24 Vardanian argues that parts of the apparatus were translated into Armenian at an early date (5th cent.), but that the ὑποθέσεις were translated later, since these texts represent a later form of Armenian, indicating that they were not included in the original Greek apparatus. However, since Vardanian wrote in Armenian, his work has a limited readership. Luckily, Willard has provided an English summary and discussion of his work.25 The apparatus also exists in different recensions in Georgian. This material was first referred to by Theodor Kluge in 1911, which he returned to in a later study.26 Neville 19

L = British Library, Add 7157. O = Oxford, New College 333. See E. von Dobschütz

o
BOE
128.

20

See von Dobschütz 1899: 129.

21

A chart of the process of transmission is given in von Dobschütz

o 
ćJT
JT
SFQSPEVDFE
JO
Willard (1970: 139/2009: 103). The work of von Dobschütz has been carried further by S. Brock (1979), who adds the manuscript Mingana syr. 343 (~1350 AD), see Brock 1979: 121.

22

B. M. Add. 19,730 (~1270 AD) and the Venice Bible at San Lazzaro (1220 AD). In addition, they refer to the Bible of Lord Zouche, which according to Conybeare was copied from a 13th century manuscript, see Conybeare

o
BOE
Robinson

o

23

See Conybeare

o
BOE


24

See P. A. Vardanian 1930.

25

See Willard

o
o
ćJT
TVNNBSZ
XBT
CBTFE
PO
Willard’s transcripts of Miss V. Semerjian’s oral translation.

26

See Th. Kluge 1911 and 1956. The first article contains only a reference to the material, which is not identified explicitly as Euthalian. The second article brings a German translation of parts of the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, the Martyrdom as well as lists of chapters and lections.

Introduction

7

Birdsall presented in 1984 a survey of the Georgian evidence and found that it survived in two forms—a shorter form of the apparatus to the Pauline letters that may have originated in the 5th century and an expanded form in the 7th century. According to Birdsall, the apparatus to Acts and the Catholic letters belongs only to the later recensions of these writings (11th cent.).27 In 1956, James W. Marchand suggested that traces of the apparatus are also found in Gothic manuscripts. In the Codices Ambrosiani A and B (6th cent.) there are divisions of the text which often correspond to Euthalian divisions, and they also have an affinity to the Euthalian edition as they indicate sense-lines. Marchand conjectures that this practice goes back to Wulfila (d. ca. 383) himself, who in turn adopted it from a Euthalian edition.28 Some ancient fragments of the apparatus in Latin are also known.29 Nils. A. Dahl found that a part of the Prologue to the Letters of Paul is found in four medieval manuscripts from Monte Cassino. Here the Euthalian material is fused with excerpts from the Muratorian Fragment. This discovery was never published.30 The Euthalian apparatus also exists in an Old Church Slavonic version. This material was edited in 2003 by Johannes G. van der Tak.31 One may conclude this survey of the different versions of the apparatus by saying that the apparatus is found mainly in Eastern churches. von Dobschütz suggested that it also may have been translated into Coptic and Ethiopic.32 To my knowledge, however, no such version has yet been found. The vast majority of manuscripts are Greek, and apart from a few witnesses, the apparatus was apparently never in wide circulation in the West. It is also important to note that the editio princeps of Zacagni does not incorporate readings from the various non-Greek versions, since they were unknown to him. The work on a new edition of the Greek text has been initiated by David Parker and Simon Crisp. For this reason, the present study does not focus on the textual transmission of the apparatus and its translation of the apparatus has been made from the text of von Soden (1902), which is strongly dependent on the text of Zacagni. The degree of dependence varies, however, in different parts of the apparatus: von Soden reproduced Zacagni’s text of the prologues with some few but important alterations, leaving out, for example, Zacagni’s textual conjectures. In reproducing the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the 27

See N. Birdsall 1984/2006: 233 and 236. He lists four manuscripts with the apparatus to the Pauline letters from the 10th and 11th centuries. The apparatus for Acts and the Catholic letters has been edited from five manuscripts. For the list of manuscripts, see Birdsall

o
-FUUFST
PG
1BVM
BOE

(Acts and the Catholic letters).

28

See J. W. Marchand

o
BOE
o
Willard

o
o

29

Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Hebrews are found in some Latin manuscripts, see von Dobschütz (1899: 111).

30

It was included in one of the drafts the present author made for Dahl 2000d, but it was left out in the printed version. For the text of the Monte Cassino manuscripts, see A. Harnack

o
Harnack did not identify the material as Euthalian, since the study is mainly concerned with the text of the Muratorian Fragment.

31

See J. G. van der Tak 2003 and Willard 2009: VII.

32

See von Dobschütz 1899: 154.

8

Introductory Issues

ὑποθέσεις, von Soden acted with greater independence, offering an eclectic text based on Zacagni and early printed editions of the NT. Although his eclectic method may be criticized from a purely theoretical point of view, it is difficult to reject von Soden’s text so long as no new critical edition has appeared. In the present work, von Soden’s text is used, mainly because of its clear separation of different elements of the apparatus.

2. History of Research 2.1. Survey In his 1516 edition of the Greek and Latin NT, Erasmus printed the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters. The Euthalian ὑποθέσεις belonged to the Greek NT which had been rediscovered by scholars in the West. Erasmus followed the ancient practice of prefixing the ὑπόθεσις to each biblical book—a practice which is found in the manuscripts of many ancient authors. Thus the plays of Euripides are often found in medieval manuscripts with a prefixed ὑπόθεσις, and a similar practice was actually continued in some early translations of the NT into modern European languages. The important change was that the reformers often wrote their own introductions in the style of the ancient ὑποθέσεις, for example, Luther’s Vorreden. This genre was a useful vehicle for the reformers who wanted to promote a new interpretation of Scripture in a form that was easy to understand. For this reason, the ancient ὑποθέσεις were soon forgotten. Also abandoned was the Euthalian system of chapter divisions in favor of the chapter divisions of Stephen Langton (12/13th cent), which are still in use today. It was thus natural that the apparatus was left out from Bible editions in modern European languages, and no longer considered useful for readers of the Bible, becoming instead a curious subject for scholars.33 In this scholarship, there have been historically four important themes (the first three of which were treated by Zacagni, and all of which returned to by later scholars): (1) The question of authorship, including the question of the identity of the dedicatee, and that of the unknown father who made the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι for the Pauline letters; (2) the question of which elements of the apparatus that are genuine, i.e. that belonged to the edition of Euthalius; (3) the question of how the biblical text was arranged by Euthalius; (4) the question of how the apparatus has applied rhetorical methods to the biblical texts. The edition of Zacagni included the Greek text with Latin translation. The apparatus contains in his edition the following elements: 1. Acts a) Prologue (Πρόλογος). b) Lection list (Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις τῶν ἀναγνώσεων), which statistically records the number of lections, chapters, quotations and verses. 33

The apparatus is given little attention in modern introductions to the New Testament. One notable exception is the work of Adolf Jülicher, see Jülicher/Fascher

o

History of Research

9

c) Introduction (Πρόγραμμα) to the short quotation list. d) Short quotation list (Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις θείων μαρτυριῶν), which does not reproduce the quotations, but merely points to them by means of numbers. e) Long quotation list (Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις θείων μαρτυριῶν), which gives the full text of the biblical quotations. f) Argument (Ὑπόθεσις). g) The Travels of Paul (Ἀποδημίαι Παύλου). h) Chapter list (Κέφαλαια-τίτλοι), which contains forty chapters with subdivisions, all having titles. i) A division of Acts into thirty-six chapters, without titles, but marked by quotation of each chapter’s opening words. 2. The Catholic letters a) Prologue (Πρόλογος). b) Lection list (Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις τῶν ἀναγνώσεων). c) Introduction (Πρόγραμμα) to the short quotation list. d) Short quotation list (Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις θείων μαρτυριῶν). e) Introduction (Πρόγραμμα) to the long quotation list. f) Long quotation list (Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις θείων μαρτυριῶν). g) Argumenta (Ὑποθέσεις ) and chapter lists (Κεφάλαια-τίτλοι) for each letter. h) Stichometric note. i) Colophon, which records that the manuscript was compared with books at the library of Caesarea, the text resembling the colophon of Codex H. j) The Inscription on the Altar in Athens (Ἐπίγραμμα τοῦ ἐν Ἀθήναις βωμοῦ), which is a short gloss giving the full text on the altar that Paul saw in Athens. k) The Voyage of Paul the Apostle to Rome (Πλοῦς Παύλου ἀποστόλου ἐπὶ Ῥώμην). This piece is often referred to as the ‘Navigatio Pauli’ recounting the itinerary of Paul’s voyage to Rome. N.B. The two last pieces belong to Acts rather than the Catholic letters—although since Acts and the Catholic letters originally formed a single volume, the two notes are not entirely misplaced. 3. The Pauline letters a) Prologue (Πρόλογος)

10

Introductory Issues

b) The Martyrdom of Paul the Apostle (Μαρτύριον Παύλου τοῦ ἀποστόλου) c) Lection list (Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις τῶν ἀναγνώσεων) d) Introduction (Πρόγραμμα) to the short quotation list e) Short quotation list (Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις θείων μαρτυριῶν) f) A list of the cities where Paul wrote his letters. g) A list of the Pauline letters that records the letters he wrote alone and the letters he wrote with various co-workers. h) Introduction (Πρόγραμμα) to the long quotation list i) Long quotation list (Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις θείων μαρτυριῶν) j) List of the Pauline letters, which begins with the words Τάδε ἔνεστιν Παύλου Ἐπιστολαί. k) A note on why the book is called ‘The Fourteen Letters of Paul’, beginning with the question Διὰ τί Παύλου Ἐπιστολαὶ δεκατέσσαρες λέγονται, followed by an answer to that question. The piece is often referred to in the secondary literature as ‘Διὰ τί.’ l) Argumenta (Ὑποθέσεις) and chapter lists (Κεφάλαια-τίτλοι) for each letter. Prefixed to the material is a long introduction by Zacagni that remains one of the most important works on Euthalius. The main points of Euthalius’ work as summarized by Zacagni are the following: Euthalius was asked by a father, whose name he does not mention, to write a prologue on the deeds of Paul. Euthalius obeyed and produced not only a prologue, but also divided the text of the letters into lections and verses. The list of lections provided scribes with a check-list of the letter’s statistics (including a στιχομετρια— the total number of lines of each lection), while the division into verses aimed at a more elegant way of reciting the biblical text. He also collected the testimonies (quotations) from the Old Testament in Paul, and added κεφάλαια-τίτλοι that he had borrowed from BO
VOLOPXO
(SFFL
GBUIFS
MJWJOH
JO
4ZSJB
QQ
MJYoMY  That this father lived in Syria, was not stated in the work of Euthalius, but was an inference that Zacagni made on the basis of the Martyrdom of Paul the Apostle. This text was transmitted together with the apparatus, and has been much discussed from Zacagni onwards. Since it has been considered the key to the questions of the date and locality of Euthalius, it is worth quoting in full:

History of Research

11

Μαρτύριον Παύλου τοῦ ἀποστόλου [Text: Robinson 1895: 29 and 47]

The Martyrdom of Paul the Apostle My translation

Ἐπὶ Νέρωνος τοῦ Καίσαρος Ῥωμαίων ἐμαρτύρησεν αὐτόθι Παῦλος ὁ ἀπόστολος, ξίφει τὴν κεφαλὴν ἀποτμηθεὶς ἐν τῷ τριακοστῷ καὶ ἕκτῳ ἔτει τοῦ σωτηρίου πάθους, τὸν καλὸν ἀγῶνα ἀγωνισάμενος ἐν Ῥώμῃ, πέπμτῃ ἡμέρᾳ Πανέμου μηνός, ἥτις λέγοιτο ἂν παρὰ Ῥωμαίοις ἡ πρὸ τριῶν καλανδῶν Ἰουλίων, καθ᾽ ἣν ἐτελειώθη ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος τῷ κατ᾽ αὐτὸν μαρτυρίῳ, ἑξηκοστῷ καὶ ἐννάτῳ ἔτει τῆς τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ παρουσίας. Ἔστιν οὖν ὁ πᾶς χρόνος ἐξ οὗ ἐμαρτύρησε τριακόσια τριάκοντα ἔτη μέχρι τῆς παρούσης ταύτης ὑπατείας, τετάρτης μὲν Ἀρκαδίου τρίτης δὲ Ὀνωρίου τῶν δύο ἀδελφῶν αὐτοκρατόρων Αὐγουστῶν, ἐννάτης ἰνδικτιῶνος τῆς πεντεκαιδεκαετηρικῆς περιόδου, μηνὸς Ἰουνίου εἰκοστῇ ἐννάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ. Ἐσημειωσάμην ἀκριβῶς τὸν χρόνον τοῦ μαρτυρίου Παύλου ἀποστόλου.

There, under Nero, emperor of the Romans, Paul the Apostle suffered martyrdom, by having his head cut off with the sword, having fought the good fight in Rome in the thirtysixth year after the passion of the Savior, on the fifth day of the month Panemos, which is called by the Romans the third day before the calends of July. On that day the holy Apostle reached perfection with the martyrdom at his [Nero’s] time, in the sixty-ninth year after the coming of our Savior Jesus Christ. So the XIPMF
QFSJPE
o
GSPN
UIF
NBSUZSEPN
UP
UIF
present consulship, the fourth of Arcadius and the third of Honorius, the two brothers ruling Augusti, the ninth indiction in the cycle of fifteen years, on the twenty-ninth day of the NPOUI
PG
+VOF
o
JT
UISFF
IVOESFE
BOE
UIJSUZ
years. I have indicated precisely the date of the martyrdom of Paul the Apostle.

[Egyptian paragraph:] καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς ὑπατίας τετάρτης μὲν Ἀρκαδίου τρίτης δὲ Ὀνωρίου, μέχρι τῆς παρούσης ταύτης ὑπατίας, πρώτης Λέοντος Αὐγούστου, ἰνδικτιῶνος δωδεκάτης, Ἐπιφὶ ε´, Διοκλετιανοῦ ροδ´, ἔτη ξγ´. ὡς εἶναι τὰ πάντα ἀπὸ τῆς τοῦ Σωτῆρος ἡμῶν παρουσίας μέχρι τοῦ προκειμένου ἔτους ἔτη τετρακόσια ἑξηκόντα δύο.

[Egyptian paragraph:] And from the fourth consulship of Arcadius and the third of Honorius to the present consulship, the first of Leo Augustus, the twelfth indiction, the fifth of Epiphi, the hundred and seventy-fourth year of Diocletian, there are sixty-three years. So all the years from the coming of our Savior until the present year are four hundred and sixty-two.

There are two textual problems that should be noted: 1. The Egyptian paragraph is not in the majority of manuscripts,34 and 2. In some manuscripts, the reference to the Egyptian month Epiphi also occurs in the first section of the text. This insertion is attested in two readings: (a) It is inserted into the Roman date: πέμπτῃ ἡμέρᾳ Πανέμου μηνός, ἥτις λέγοιτ᾽ ἂν παρὰ Ῥωμαίοις, κατ᾽ Αἰγυπτίους Ἐπιφὶ ε´, ἡ πρὸ τριῶν καλανδῶν Ἰουλίων. (b) It is inserted before the Roman date: πέμπτῃ ἡμέρᾳ κατὰ Συρομακεδόνας Πανέμου μηνός, ἥτις λέγοιτο ἂν παρ᾽ Αἰγυπτίοις Ἐπιφί, παρὰ δὲ Ῥωμαίοις ἡ πρὸ τριῶν καλανδῶν Ἰουλίων. Robinson argues that the first reading contains a gloss (κατ᾽ Αἰγυπτίους Ἐπιφὶ ε´) that has crept into the text. Its insertion is awkward since it breaks up the sentence, separating the reference to the Romans and their calendar. The second reading is a correction of

34

See Willard

o
o

12

Introductory Issues

the first, with the gloss being worked into the text with greater care, and the phrase κατὰ Συρομακεδόνας clarifying the provenance of the different calendars.35 Another problem is that the Martyrdom refers to two different years as the ‘present consulship.’ This clearly reflects two stages in the development of the text. Zacagni found that 29 June in the fourth consulship of Arcadius and the third of Honorius corresponds to 29 June, 396, while 5 Epiphi in the first consulship of Leo Augustus corresponds to 29 June, 458. He thus noted the discrepancy between the chronology of Euthalius and the Dionysian chronology current today.36 According to the chronology of the Martyrdom, $ISJTU
EJFE
BU
UIF
BHF
PG
UIJSUZUISFF
JO
UIF
ZFBS
XIJDI
DPSSFTQPOET
UP
PVS

QQ
MYJo lxii). While this problem was easily solved, the use of different methods of dating was a more demanding puzzle. In the first paragraph, the anonymous author says that Paul suffered martyrdom on the third day before the calends of July (29 June) which he equates with 5 Panemos. Zacagni considered this equation particularly important and based his argument on the dissertations of cardinal Enrico Noris on the Syro-Macedonian calendar.37 In his work, Noris had quoted a passage from the Martyrdom, which he knew from Oecumenius’ commentary on Acts. In Oecumenius, the text form explicitly referred to Panemos as a Syro-Macedonian month.38 According to Noris, 5 Panemos would be the correct date only in cities of Palestine such as Raphia, Ascalon and Gaza. In this area the Syro-Macedonian month Panemos corresponded exactly to the Egyptian month Epiphi, both beginning on 25 June.39 Zacagni thus assumed that the Martyrdom was first dated in Palestine in 396 by the anonymous predecessor of Euthalius, who used the version of the Syro-Macedonian calendar prevalent in areas of Syria under Egyptian influence. ćJT
4ZSJBOCBTFE
(SFFL
GBUIFS
XBT
BMTP
SFTQPOTJCMF
GPS
UIF
Ϩϣϲрϩϟϧϟϰцϰϩϭϧ
QQ
MWJJJo lix). He conjectured that the second year given in the Martyrdom (458) was the year when 35

For a list of the manuscripts and a discussion of these readings see Robinson

o

36

The Martyrdom reckons years from the birth of Christ by moving the date four years backward on the calendar according to our time-reckoning. The system of dating from the birth of Christ became common much later, cf. H. Lietzmann (1934/1984: 5): ‘Die christliche Ära (nach Christi Geburt) ist die in der modernen Kulturwelt allgemein gültige. Sie ist von dem römischen Mönch Dionysios Exiguus erfunden und in seiner Ostertafel vom Jahre 532 zuerst angewendet worden. Seinem Beispiel folgen anfangs nur gelehrte in chronographischen Werken, aber im 8. Jahrhundert finden wir Datierungen nach Christi Geburt schon vereinzelt auf Urkunden, privaten und königlichen; im 9. Jh. begegnen wir sie öfter, und seit dem 10. Jh. erscheint diese Datierungsweise auch auf päpstlichen Urkunden. Schliesslich wird sie im hohen Mittelalter allgemein üblich.’ von Soden (1902: 374) thinks that the original text of the Martyrdom (the ‘Urstück’ without the Egyptian paragraph) did not include the reckoning from the birth of Christ. The recalculation was, according to von Soden, added to the ‘Urstück’ at an early stage. In the Egyptian paragraph (458 AD), on the other hand, this system of dating is used. Even this is earlier than Dionysius. Most scholars believe that the dates in the Martyrdom
UIBU
SFGFS
UP
JUT
DPNQPTJUJPO
DBO
CF
USVTUFE
ćVT
UIF
.BSUZSEPN
o
BU
MFBTU
JO
JUT
FYQBOEFE
GPSN
o
JT
FBSMZ
FWJEFODF
GPS
UIF
VTF
PG
UIF
OFX
TZTUFN
%JFUFS
4ÊOHFS
CSPVHIU
UIJT
GFBUVSF
of the Martyrdom to my attention.

37

De annis et epochis Syromacedonum (first printed in Florence, 1691). I have not had access to this edition, but use an edition printed in Leipzig in 1696 (Noris 1696).

38

E. Noris (1696: 22) offers the following translation: quinta die, juxta Syromacedones, mensis Panemi, qui apud Ægyptios dici potest Epiphi; apud Romanos vero III Kalendas Julias, vicesimo nono mensis Junii. Cf. the text as printed by Robinson (1895: 46): πέμπτῃ ἡμέρᾳ κατὰ Συρομακεδόνας Πανέμου μηνός, ἥτις λέγοιτο ἂν παρ᾽ Αἰγυπτίοις Ἐπιφί, παρὰ δὲ Ῥωμαίοις ἡ πρὸ τριῶν καλανδῶν Ἰουλίων.

39

See Noris

o
BOE
o

History of Research

13

Euthalius published his volume on Paul. Euthalius had expanded the Martyrdom and included a reference to the Era of Diocletian and the Egyptian month Epiphi, which indicates that Egypt was his home.40 Zacagni also found his hypothesis confirmed in the Acts of Chalcedon, which mentioned a deacon of the Alexandrian church who was named Euthalius (p. lxii). Zacagni also tried to place the name ‘Sulci’ into this Egyptian setting, asTVNJOH
A4VMDJ
UP
CF
B
DPSSVQUJPO
PG
A1TFMDIB 
UIF
OBNF
PG
BO
&HZQUJBO
UPXO
Q
MYJJJoMYJW  The second volume of Euthalius, containing the Acts and the Catholic letters, was dedicated to Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria. Euthalius, in his preparation of the volume, visited the library of Caesarea in Palestine in order to compare his text with biblical manuscripts in that library.41 In this volume, Euthalius had made the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι himself, using the work of the Syrian father on the Pauline letters as a model (p. lxvi). Zacagni identified the dedicatee of the edition of Acts as Athanasius Celetes, archbishop of Alexandria from 490 (pp. lxiv), but this identification created a new problem. Euthalius had been present at Chalcedon in 451 and had made his volume on Paul in 458, as this was the year mentioned in the second paragraph of the Martyrdom. Since he was referred to as the ‘Deacon Euthalius’ in the title to the Prologue to the Letters of Paul he must have been at least twenty-five in 458, Zacagni reckoned, as younger men could not be ordained. Since Zacagni assumes that archbishop Athanasius Celetes was the dedicatee, it could only be after 490 that Euthalius made his volume on Acts and the Catholic letters. But, if so, how could he, in the introductory paragraph to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts, have referred to himself as ‘young in years and in learning’? Zacagni assumed that these words of Euthalius should be understood as an allegory, referring to the ‘recent times’ in which he lived, and that his learning is considered insignificant compared to the great learning of the ancient fathers of the Church (p. lxiii). Regarding the question of the genuine Euthalian elements, Zacagni doubted that the ὑποθέσεις were included in the original editions of Euthalius. His main reason was that they are never referred to in the prologues. There were also some contradictions between the ὑποθέσεις and the list of cities where Paul wrote his letters, a list which he considered genuine. He discussed the possibility that the ὑποθέσεις were written by the unknown Syrian father who also had made the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, but concluded that they most probably belonged to a later period. The ὑποθέσεις, then, were composed by ‘some pious and learned man,’ and scribes had added them to the apparatus (p. lx). Zacagni also observed that Euthalius had arranged the text so that the reading aloud of the text would be more elegant. This he did by dividing the text into verses, ‘somewhat similar to song’ ad quandam cantus similitudinem
QQ
MJYoMY 
ćJT
WJFX
IF
CBTFE
on the Euthalian Prologue to Acts, where Euthalius said that he had read the text κατὰ 40

See Zacagni 1698: lxi. Zacagni noted that the reference to the twelfth indiction is problematic, as he would expect the 29th of June to fall in the year of the eleventh indiction. He suggests that Euthalius used a different system. On reckoning by indiction, see E. J. Bickerman

o

41

See Zacagni 1698: lxv. The basis of this is the end of a stichometrical note at the end of the edition of Acts and the Catholic letters: Ἀντεβλήθη δὲ τῶν Πράξεων καὶ καθολικῶν Ἐπιστολῶν τὸ βιβλίον πρὸς τὰ ἀκριβῆ ἀντίγραφα τῆς ἐν Καισαρείᾳ βιβλιοθήκης Εὐσεβίου τοῦ Παμφίλου. ‘The book of the Acts and the Catholic letters was compared with the exact copies of the Caesarean Library of Eusebius son of Pamphilus.’ The note is found in Zacagni’s edition on p. 513 and in PG 85: 692AB.

14

Introductory Issues

προσωδίαν. The theory, however, is probably based on a misunderstanding, since the Greek word προσωδία may refer to accents or other reading signs.42 In the prolegomena to his 1707 edition of the New Testament, John Mill suggested that the Syrian father who had written the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Pauline letters was Theodore of Mopsuestia. Mill gives the following reasons for this conjecture: (1) Theodore was a Syrian, a presbyter in Antioch and that before 396, the first year mentioned in the Martyrdom, he became bishop of Mopsuestia in Cilicia. (2) He was known as a learned man, who had also written a commentary on the Pauline letters. (3) The fact that Euthalius does not mention his name actually supports his hypothesis. Theodore was despised and later condemned as a heretic at the Second Council of Constantinople, so it was not advisable to name him explicitly.43 The theory of Mill has had some influence on other scholars, such as Harris (see below). Jacob Wettstein included an entry on Euthalius in the prolegomena to his edition of the NT. The article is largely dependent on Zacagni’s work, but contains some new ideas. Wettstein believed, like Zacagni, that Euthalius lived in 5th century Egypt, basing this belief on the Egyptian paragraph of the Martyrdom.44 The most important difference from Zacagni lies in his view on what Euthalius had done with the biblical text since he emphasized the influence of Origen on Euthalius. This influence was not so much from Origen the theologian as the philologist. Wettstein believed that Euthalius had furnished the text with accents and breathing marks, possibly in imitation of the Origen’s Hexapla. He argued that Origen had supplied accents to his Greek transliteration of the Hebrew in order to avoid incorrect pronunciation, and that Origen’s treatment of the poetical books of the OT corresponded to the writing the text in sense-lines.45 Wettstein also rejected Zacagni’s view that the dedicatee to the edition of Acts was the bishop Athanasius Celetes. Instead he identified the dedicatee as the presbyter Athanasius, a nephew of the patriarch Cyrillos. To this Athanasius he ascribed the Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae, a collection of ὑποθέσεις of all biblical books.46 The ὑποθέσεις of the Euthalian editions are also found in the Synopsis, and Wettstein believed that Athanasius had borrowed the work of Euthalius.47 In 1883, James Rendel Harris published his study on stichometry. The first part of the study is devoted to the practice of stichometry in antiquity, while the second part discusses the stichometry of the NT writings and the work done by Euthalius in this respect. Harris first notes that the term στίχος early came to denote a standard hexameter line of sixteen syllables48 and was also used to measure prose texts. It was on a per-στίχος basis that scribes received their payment.49 Harris also noted a change in the meaning of the 42

See Zuntz 1945: 90.

43

See J. Mill 1707: lxxxvii.

44

See Wettstein

o

45

See Wettstein

o

46

The work is treated by Robinson

o 

47

See Wettstein 1752: 76.

48

The number 16 may have been picked because of its symmetrical character, or because the first line of the Iliad contains this number. See Harris 1883: 139.

49

See Harris 1883: 154.

History of Research

15

term στίχος under the influence of the ‘sense-line’, and found that the word may also designate a ‘sentence.’ This use of the term may reflect the fact that a hexameter line very often corresponds to a sentence unit.50 In the second part of the study, Harris examines the stichometry of the NT and finds that the figures in the Euthalian lection lists reflect a measuring of the text in units of sixteen syllables.51 This study of stichometry is one aspect of the broader work of Harris, which really may be considered a development of Wettstein’s ideas; also a Wettstein development is Harris’ suggestion that the greater part of Euthalius’ work originated in the time and school of Origen.52 In 1890, Codex H was edited by Henri Omont. Although this manuscript had been connected to Euthalius also by earlier scholars,53 the edition of Omont instigated more intensive research on its relation to the Euthalian apparatus. Ehrhard published in 1891 a study of codex H and Euthalius,54 using a manuscript which has been important for study of the apparatus not only because it is written in sense-lines and contains κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and marginal notes on testimonies, but especially because it contains a colophon placed after Tit. which resembles the prologues of the apparatus. The opening line of the colophon has been damaged, and cannot be read with certainty. The second part of the colophon is a dialogue between the personified coronis—the flourish of the pen at the end of the text— and the owner of the book. The end of the text, however, is not preserved in Codex H. Just like the Martyrdom, this short text has been very important for scholars and should therefore be reproduced here:

50

See Harris 1883: 151.

51

See Harris 1883: 317. Harris presupposes that the text of Euthalius used abbreviated forms of the words θεός, κύριος, Ἰησοῦς and Χριστός.

52

Harris 1883: 331.

53

Wettstein (1752: 74) considered this manuscript an early representative of the Euthalian edition.

54

See Ehrhard 1891.

16

Introductory Issues

Colophon of Codex H 015 (after Omont 1890: 189)a

My translation

ἔγραψα καὶ ἐξεθέμην στειχηρὸν κατὰ δύναμιν τόδε τὸ τεῦχος Παύλου τοῦ ἀποστόλου πρὸς ἐγγραμμὸν καὶ εὐκαταλημπτὸν ἀνάγνωσιν· τῶν καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς ἀδελφῶν παρ᾽ ὧν ἁπάντων τολμῆς· συνγνώμην αἰτῶ· εὐχῇ τῇ ὑπὲρ ἐμῶν· τὴν συνπεριφορὰν κομιζόμενος·

I wrote and edited this volume of Paul the Apostle, arranging it in verses according to my abilities, so that the text of our brothers may be clearly writtenb and easy to understand, and I ask all of them for forgiveness for my audacity, that I may receive acceptance through prayer for my [work (?)].

Ἀντεβλήθη δὲ ἡ βίβλος· πρὸς τὸ ἐν Καισαρίᾳ The book was compared with a copy in the liἀντίγραφον· τῆς βιβλιοθήκης τοῦ ἁγίου brary of Caesarea, written with the hand of the holy Pamphilus. Παμφίλου· χειρὶ γεγραμμένον. προσφώνησις Κορωνίς εἰμι δογμάτων θείων διδάσκαλος· ἄν τινί με χρήσῃς· ἀντιβίβλον λάμβανε. οἱ γὰρ· ἀποδόται κακοί·

Address I am the Coronis, teacher of the divine doctrine. If you lend me to anyone, you should get a receipt, because borrowers are evil.

ἀντίφρασις· Θησαυρὸν ἔχων σε πνευματικῶν ἀγαθῶν καὶ πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις ποθητὸν· ἁρμονίαις τε καὶ ποικίλαις γραμμαῖς κεκοσμημένον· νὴ τὴν ἀλήθειαν· οὐ δώσω σε προχείρως τινὶ· οὐδ᾽ αὖ φθονέσω τῆς […]

Answer I keep you as a treasure of spiritual blessings, one which is longed for by all men, combined from many parts and adorned with writing in various colors. In truth, I will not rashly give you to anyone, nor again will I grudge the […]

a Since my aim is simply to give an idea of the content of the piece, I reproduce the texts in minuscule letters with added word divisions and without the line breaks of the original. For a full discussion of the textual variants of the colophon, see Willard

o
o b The word ‘ἐγγραμμὸν’ does not make any sense in this context, and the translation presupposes that the word represents ’εὔγραμμον.’

Ehrhard compared codex H with minuscule 88 which contains the same colophon.55 Minuscule 88 is a 12th century manuscript containing Acts, the Catholic and Pauline letters with the Euthalian apparatus and also the Apocalypse. The most important textual variant is that the colophon in min. 88 begins with the words Εὐάγριος ἔγραψα. It is possible that this reading is supported in Ehrhard’s examination of a codex H facsimile, where UIF
MFUUFST
&:y*0$
FYJTU
"U
UIF
SFRVFTU
PG
Ehrhard, H. Omont examined the line and arrived at the conclusion that the name Εὐάγριος apparently could be discerned.56 The presence of the name ‘Evagrius’ in the earliest Euthalian manuscript led him to assume that it was Evagrius who was the author of the apparatus. Ehrhard identified him with the Egyptian monk Evagrius Ponticus (4th cent.), although he acknowledged that Evagrius was a common name, and that there were likely many Egyptian monks with that name. Ehrhard noted that the name ‘Euthalius’ was found in very few manuscripts and that other names, such as Athanasius, Pamphilus and Ecthalios also occur. Moreover, there 55

The dialogue beginning with The ‘Address’ is however separated from the first part of the colophon by The Voyage of Paul the Apostle to Rome. See Ehrhard

o
ćF
UFYU
PG
UIF
DPMPQIPO
DPOUJOVFT
JO
min. 88 with ὠφελειας. χρήσω δὲ τοῖς φίλοις, ἀξιόπιστον ἀντίβιβλον λαμβάνων. Robinson (1895: 9) gives the following translation of the end of the colophon (based on the Armenian version): ‘Nor again will I grudge the benefit of any, but when I lend thee to my friends, I will take a goodly copy in exchange.’

56

See Ehrhard 1891: 397.

History of Research

17

was little historical evidence about ‘Euthalius.’57 These problems were solved by assuming that ‘Euthalius’ had never existed, and that this name was substituted for ‘Evagrius’ after Evagrius had been condemned as an Origenist. This would also explain why someone would try to erase the name in Codex H. That is, the tradition had adopted the work of Evagrius, but did not want to mention the name of the heretic.58 The introduction of the name ‘Evagrius’ was a new turn in the history of research. A related hypothesis was later proposed by Birdsall, who suggested that it was Evagrius of Antioch, not Evagrius Ponticus, who was the author of the apparatus.59 The hypothesis of Ehrhard was criticized by von Dobschütz, who in 1893 published an article where he argued that Codex H represents a late form of the Euthalian edition, and that the colophon is dependent on the Euthalian prologues.60 Some of his arguments based on the phraseology of the colophon were also used by Robinson (see below). In 1893, Harris published a new edition of his study of stichometry. In this treatise, he also included a lecture on the origin of the codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. The work of Euthalius is quite important for this argument on origins. Harris connects Euthalius to Caesarea and its library on the basis of the following evidence: (1) The colophon at the end of the Euthalian edition of Acts and the Catholic letters mentions Caesarea explicitly. (2) The colophon of Codex H is a Euthalian text that is very close to the archetype.61 This also refers to Caesarea. (3) In Codex Coislinianus 25, the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts has the heading ἔκθεσις κεφαλαίων τῶν πράξεων τοῦ Παμφίλου. Regarding this third argument, Harris argues that even if this does not prove that Pamphilus was the author of the list, the heading does show that the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι were once ascribed to Pamphilus.62 Harris found that the Caesarean origin of the apparatus also had some explanatory value: the list of thirty-six chapters that is found at the end of the apparatus to Acts corresponds to the original chapter divisions of Acts in Codex Vaticanus. A system of division used at the library of Caesarea is supposed to lie behind this.63 Harris also has his original views regarding the circle of Euthalius.64 His starting point is the long Encomium of Melete in the Prologue to Acts, where Melete is the personification of scriptural studies or meditation upon the scriptures. In this section, Harris finds that Euthalius is playing with the word Melete: ‘[H]e has personified her and made her into a fair bride for the good father to whom he writes. But why should he say of her that she is his foster sister, ay! and his namesake?’65 Harris gives the following answer: The name of 57

See Ehrhard

o

58

See Ehrhard

o

59

See Birdsall 1970.

60

See von Dobschütz 1893.

61

Harris does not refer to the work of Ehrhard or to the name ‘Εὐάγριος.’

62

See Harris 1893: 88. Harris had earlier argued that there were connections between Codex Sinaiticus and Caesarean manuscripts that were used to correct it. Thus both Vaticanus and Sinaiticus were somehow related to the library of Caesarea. See Harris 1893: 75. See the translation of these κεφάλαια-τίτλοι to Acts in S. D. Salmond 1886.

63

See Harris

o

64

His theory regarding the origin of the apparatus is found in Harris

o

65

Harris 1893: 81.

18

Introductory Issues

the dedicatee was not Athanasius, but Meletius, and the name Meletius was often associated with heresy. ‘Athanasius’ is not an historical person, but only the orthodox substitute for the name of the heretic. The correct heading of the prologue is thus Εὐθαλίου ... πρὸς Μελέτιον. Harris finds three possible candidates, but considers Meletius of Mopsuestia, the pupil of Theodore, the most plausible. The reason for this choice is that Harris connects Euthalius to the second edition of the Martyrdom in 458, as Zacagni also had done. Harris differs, however, from Zacagni with regard to the date of the edition of Acts and the Catholic letters, arguing that the editions of the Pauline letters and that of the Acts and the Catholic letters were not separated by thirty years, but were produced almost at the same time.66 When Harris had suggested Meletius of Mopsuestia as the dedicatee of the edition of Acts and the Catholic letters, he was delighted to find that this idea was indirectly supported by Mill, who had conjectured that Theodore of Mopsuestia was the unnamed Syrian father who wrote the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Pauline letters. Harris also recorded some correspondences between the Euthalian material and the commentary on the Pauline letters by Theodore.67 The third conjecture of Harris concerns the dedicatee of the edition of Paul. Harris suspects that this was no other than Nestorius. Thus, he has drawn the Euthalian apparatus into the sphere of the heretics Theodore, Nestorius, and Meletius. This is supposed to explain why the text of the apparatus is so vague about its origin. In 1895, F. C. Conybeare introduced Armenian evidence into the discussion. His most important witness was an Armenian manuscript in the British Museum (B. M. Add. 19,730), which he dates to the late 13th century. It contains the apostolic books in the following order: 1. Apocalypse 2. The Pauline letters with Heb placed after 2 Thessalonians. 3. Acts 4. The Catholic letters. This order is significant, as it is also found in other ancient Armenian manuscripts and has points of contact with Codex Sinaiticus.68 The manuscript also contains the Euthalian prologues. Among other Euthalian materials we find The Voyage of Paul the Apostle to Rome prefixed to Acts. An important element for the argument of Conybeare is the colophon found after Philemon, which he identified as the colophon of Codex H. This piece he also found in the Venice Bible (1220 AD) and in the Zouche Bible. Conybeare gives the following translation:69 I wrote out and arranged as far as possible verse by verse (= κατὰ δύναμιν στιχηρόν) the writings of Paul the Apostle, disposing (them) also in easily understood (or ‘grasped’) readings (ἀναγνώσεις) for (or of) our brethren. Of all of whom I crave indulgence for my boldness; in order that by means of the prayers, to be offered in our behalf, I may receive your condescension towards me. This book was copied according to (or ‘from’) an exemplar of Caesarea, which lies there in the chest of books, and which was written with his own hand by the holy Pamphilus. 66

Harris can place also the edition of Acts and the Catholic letters in that year or immediately after because he no longer needs to bring Athanasius Celetes on the scene, see Harris 1893: 83.

67

He mentions the ὑποθέσεις to Eph and Col, which both state that Paul at the time had not met the recipients but heard about them. The third κεφάλαιον to Eph is also very close to Theodore’s interpretation, see Harris 1893: 86.

68

In the Codex Sinaiticus the Pauline letters are placed before Acts. Within the Paulines, Heb follows 2 Thessalonians. See Conybeare 1895: 245.

69

Conybeare

o

History of Research

19

Advice I am master and teacher of the divine religion.70 If thou lend me to anyone, thou shalt take a goodly copy in my stead, for those who (?+have to) restore (i.e. books) are evil. Reply I keep thee a treasure of spiritual blessings, adorned with embellishments (or ‘arrangeNFOUT
EFTJSFE
PG
BMM
NFO
BOE
XJUI
BMM
TPSUT
PG
PSOBNFOUT
:FB
*
TQFBL
USVMZ
*
XJMM
OPU
vainly lend thee to anyone. Nor another time will I be jealous of (or? for) the weal of anyone. But when I shall lend thee to my friends, I will take a goodly copy (or exemplar) in exchange for thee.

Conybeare assumed that the colophon is the work of Euthalius, and that the sense-lines of Codex H are those of Euthalius himself. The Armenian text of the Martyrdom also indicated that the Armenian represented an early version of the apparatus. He found that the text of the Martyrdom in the Zouche Bible did not contain the Egyptian paragraph or the inserted reference to Epiphi in the first paragraph.71 In addition to his discussion of Euthalian texts, Conybeare also discussed external evidence on Euthalius from the Armenian ‘Book of the Caesars.’ He discusses four short notices, the first is the following:72 Arcadius and Honorius, sons of Theodosius the Great, ruled 24 years. In his (sic) third year there was Euthalius, a blessed (father), an Alexandrine, who in admirable copies arranged (or ‘drew up’ lit. ‘ordered’) the preface and the particulars (or sections), and the lections of the Holy Apostles and of the seven Catholic Epistles, on account of the heresies then existing, of Kalabros and Karpokrates, of Katharos and Eklaros (sic), who said that Christ was a mere man, and rejected the Old Testament and despised its testimony concerning Christ.

The third notice contains the remarkable information that Euthalius had made the edition of the Pauline letters at the request of ‘the great father’ Theophilus, while the edition of Acts and the Catholic letters was made at the request of the ‘royal ecclesiastic’ Athanasius. Although Conybeare cannot tell what significance ‘royal’ has in this context, he identifies Theophilus as the bishop of Alexandria from 385 AD. The value of the evidence is debated. von Dobschütz points out that the notices to a large extent are derived from the prologues and the Martyrdom. What goes beyond this, he is willing to ascribe to the free imagination of an Armenian heresiologist.73 The work of these critics were used by Robinson in his Euthaliana.74 Robinson had recovered the text of several leaves of codex H. As in the work of Ehrhard and Conybeare, the colophon is very important for his views on Euthalius. Robinson does not consider the

70

The Armenian translation of ‘κορωνίς’ as ‘master’ seems to Birdsall (1984/2006: 221) like a wild guess. It is however possible that the translator has confused ‘κορωνίς’ with ‘κοίρανος.’

71

See Conybeare

o

72

The texts are reproduced in Conybeare

o

73

See von Dobschütz 1899: 113.

74

Conybeare 1895 and Robinson 1895.

20

Introductory Issues

colophon Euthalian, but believes that it is based on the Euthalian prologues.75 His main arguments are the following:76 (1) In the colophon, the author refers to himself as ‘I’ not as ‘we’, as in the parallel material in the Euthalian Prologue to Acts. (2) The colophon uses ἐξεθέμην for the whole edition of the Pauline letters, while Euthalius uses this verb for the exposition or list of chapters.77 (3) The colophon uses the word στειχηρόν to describe the arrangement of the text in lines. This term is apparently a contamination of the terms στιχηρῶς and στιχηδόν that are found in Euthalius. (4) The phrase εὐχῇ τῇ ὑπὲρ ἐμῶν τὴν συνπεριφορὰν κομιζόμενος in the colophon seems to be an unhappy reworking of the introduction to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts: εὐχῇ τῇ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν τὴν συμπεριφορὰν κομιζόμενοι. The word ἐμῶν has apparently replaced ἡμῶν, but the meaning of the phrase in the colophon is unclear.78 It is thus evidence of a careless rewriting of the text in the singular. The epitomizer should have replaced ἡμῶν with ἐμοῦ. Robinson suggests that the difficult ἐμῶν may not be the work of the epitomizer, but of a later scribe who was trying to improve the text. In his discussion of Robinson’s work, Willard points out that the source-critical method that Robinson applied to the colophon led him to treat the Martyrdom similarly. Not only the colophon but also the Martyrdom could be the work of a later editor, and Robinson sought to demonstrate that the Martyrdom was a later addition, dependent on the Prologue to the Letters of Paul.79 His main reasons for assuming literary dependence were the following observations.80 (1) The Martyrdom first refers to the date of Paul’s death with the Roman designation ‘the third day before the calends of July.’ Close to the end of the first paragraph (see text above) it uses the more modern designation ‘on the twenty-ninth day of the month of June.’ This last form may represent the idiom of the author of the Martyrdom, while the use of the Roman calendar seems to be derived from Prologue to the Letters of Paul.81 (2) The relative clause καθ᾽ ἣν ἐτελειώθη ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος τῷ κατ᾽ αὐτὸν μαρτυρίῳ is difficult to understand. One should expect that the words κατ᾽ αὐτόν referred 75

See Robinson

o

76

See Robinson

o

77

This argument was also used by von Dobschütz (1893: 50): ‘Die Phrase ἔγραψα καὶ ἐξεθέμην ist aus Euthalius überhaupt nicht zu belegen.’

78

This was pointed out also by von Dobschütz (1893: 50), who could not make any sense out of ὑπὲρ ἐμῶν.

79

See Robinson

o

80

See Willard

o
o

81

Ῥωμαῖοι δὲ περικαλλέσιν οἴκοις καὶ βασιλείοις τούτου λείψανα καθείρξαντες, ἐπέτειον αὐτῷ μνήμης ἡμέραν πανηγυρίζουσι, τῇ πρὸ τριῶν καλανδῶν Ἰουλίων, πέμπτῃ Πανέμου μηνὸς, τούτου τὸ μαρτύριον ἑορτάζοντες. In the present volume, see section “[The Celebration of his Martyrdom]” on page 104.

History of Research

21

to Nero in whose reign Paul died as a martyr. The problem with this interpretation is that Nero has not been mentioned since the opening line of the Martyrdom. Robinson found that the corresponding passage in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul provided the solution to this puzzle. There we read καὶ ἐῤῥύσθην ἐκ στόματος λέοντος· τοῦτον τὸν Νέρωνα εἶναι λέγων· περὶ δὲ τῆς δευτέρας, ἐν ᾗ καὶ τελειοῦται τῷ κατ᾽ αὐτὸν μαρτυρίῳ, φησίν· τὴν καλὴν διακονίαν σου πληροφόρησον·.82 There is no difficulty with the syntax, and αὐτόν clearly refers to Nero. Thus, the problem in the text of the Martyrdom is apparently caused by a mechanical copying of this passage, and the epitomizer has ignored the previous circumstances; in doing so the reference to Nero became obscure. (3) The author of the Martyrdom says that Paul died a martyr on 29 June. This is however not the date of Paul’s death, but the date of the depositio of his remains that happened almost two centuries later. Robinson stated that although this error is common in later times, it was not found in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul. In addition to these main points, Robinson also argued on a more general basis that Euthalius would not have imitated his own language in this slavish manner. The wealth of expression that is found in the Euthalian prologues suggested to him a more original author. He also rejected the possibility that the Martyrdom was a source-text for Prologue to the Letters of Paul, arguing that it was, in fact, the opposite. After all, the three main arguments referred to above, as well as the great intervals between the parallel passages in the prologue, made it improbable that the Martyrdom could have been a source-text.83 Robinson thus was convinced that the Martyrdom was the work of a later hand. A new dating was necessary: he had to place the Euthalian edition of the Letters of Paul some time before 396, the earliest year that was mentioned in the Martyrdom. The Prologue to the Letters of Paul refers to Eusebius, and thus Euthalius could be placed somewhere in the 4th century. Thus it was possible to consider the great Athanasius (d. 372) the dedicatee of the volume of the Acts and the Catholic letters.84 Another feature of the study of Robinson is the connection he made between the Martyrdom and the colophon. Both texts were derived from the Euthalian prologues, and he assumed that they both belonged to a later editio minor of the apparatus. Since the name ‘Evagrius’ occurred in some copies of the colophon, Robinson was inclined to believe that Evagrius Ponticus was responsible for this abridged edition.85 Regarding the question of the genuine Euthalian elements, Robinson is one of the most radical critics, since he used the text of the prologues as a criterion of authenticity. That is, only the items that Euthalius explicitly referred to in the prologues should be considered original. Thus only three items could be considered genuine: The prologues, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the collections of testimonies.86 82

In the present volume, the section “[Chronological summary]” on page 108.

83

See Robinson 1895: 29.

84

See Robinson

o
&WFO
JG
UIF
"UIBOBTJVT
PG
"MFYBOESJB
XBT
B
QPTTJCMF
EFEJDBUFF
Robinson hesitated to draw any conclusion regarding the locality of Euthalius.

85

See Robinson 1895: 71.

86

See Robinson

o
XJUI
IJT
DPODMVTJPO
PO
UIF
MBTU
QBHF

22

Introductory Issues

In 1896, Harris published an essay focusing on the relations between Euthalius and Eusebius.87 Harris argued that Euthalius was not an original writer with ‘so great a wealth of expression’ as Robinson believed.88 Harris first observed that Euthalius himself had pointed to Eusebius as one of his sources, and he proceeded to examine this literary relationship in greater detail. He found that large portions of the Euthalian prologues were derived from the The History of the Church and Chronicon of Eusebius, and thus that Euthalius was a ‘systematic plagiarist.’89 This dependence on Eusebius was used by Harris to restore the Martyrdom as belonging to the original apparatus. While Robinson had argued that the Martyrdom was based on the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, Harris now suggested that both texts were derived from Eusebius. In order to show this, Harris criticizes the three arguments of Robinson on the Martyrdom:90 (1) Harris finds it natural that the author of the Martyrdom, in a passage that brings the dates down to his own day, refers to 25 June. The calendrical dating of Paul’s martyrdom to 5 Panemos is older than both Eusebius and Euthalius. It is therefore not necessarily derived from the Prologue to the Letters of Paul. Eusebius does not use the Syro-Macedonian calendar, but refers to dates by Roman months with Syro-Macedonian names. (2) The clause with the difficult phrase κατ᾽ αὐτὸν is not derived from the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, but from Eusebius (H. E. ii, 22): δεύτερον δ᾽ ἐπιβάντα τῇ αὐτῇ πόλει, τῷ κατ᾽ αὐτὸν τελειωθῆναι μαρτυρίῳ. Harris finds that there is a similar obscurity in the use of κατ᾽ αὐτόν here, and concludes that the Martyrdom here actually is closer to Eusebius. (3) Regarding the error concerning the date of the Paul’s martyrdom, Harris interprets the evidence of the Prologue to the Letters of Paul differently. Again, he builds his argument on the text of Eusebius. In H. E. iii, 31, Eusebius refers to his earlier treatment of the deaths of Paul and Peter and their depositio in the Vatican and on the Ostian way in H. E. ii, 25 respectively. Harris finds that even Eusebius is unclear at this point, and argues that the error in the Martyrdom does not necessarily represent a misunderstanding of the text of Eusebius or the Prologue to the Letters of Paul. A further consequence of these three criticisms, is that Robinson’s theory of a second epitomizer, working after Euthalius, is unnecessary, and Harris suggests that Euthalius had written the Martyrdom himself.91 Harris did not confine himself to source-criticism, but was also conscious of the influence of generic convention upon the prologues. The prologues could be read in a wider context, as texts belonging to a literary culture with certain expectations as to what a prologue should contain. Thus he described the opening

87

See Harris 1896.

88

Harris 1896: 64, cf. Robinson 1895: 29.

89

Harris


)JT
FWJEFODF
GPS
UIJT
WFSEJDU
JT
QSFTFOUFE
PO
QQ
o

90

The discussion of these three arguments is found in Harris

o

91

See Harris

o

History of Research

23

of the Prologue to the Letters of Paul as ‘a conventional opening to a new book.’92 However, the reading of Euthalius in the light of literary conventions is not so much a concern for Harris, as it is to show the invidual borrowings from the Eusebius’ text. The study of von Dobschütz on the Syriac version of Euthalius, referred to above, is to a large extent concerned with the history of the Syriac NT, but is, nevertheless, clearly of importance also for general research on Euthalius. Regarding the date of Euthalius, von Dobschütz noted that the versions of the Martyrdom in L and O refer to the 819th year of Alexander the Great, which corresponds to our 508 AD. This is also the year in which the Philoxenian revision of the Peshitta was produced. The manuscript O brings some additions to the text of the Martyrdom, as it looks back to that year (508 AD) as the year when a previous translation of this writing from Greek into Syriac was made.93 This edition led von Dobschütz to associate the text of the Martyrdom in O with the Harclean version from 616 AD. The implication is that not only the Martyrdom, but also a form of the Euthalian apparatus was present already in the Philoxenian version.94 Regarding the question of the genuine Euthalian elements, it is worth noting, however, that the Syriac manuscripts von Dobschütz examined did not contain the ὑποθέσεις. In the first volume of von Soden’s Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments (1902) a large amount of auxiliary material to the NT writings was included. Among this material we find the complete Euthalian apparatus, albeit in separated elements. von Soden also reconstructs a biography of Euthalius, employing a method that is basically a close reading of the prologues and some related texts as sources for the life and times of Euthalius.95 Unfortunately, von Soden did not refer to the work of Harris from 1896 where the influence of generic conventions was acknowledged. von Soden tends to take the rhetoric of Euthalius seriously as a personal testimony of the author. He noted a marked difference both in style and content between the Prologue to the Letters of Paul and the Prologue to Acts, considering the former a respectable piece of work, while the latter is full of selfdeprecating phrases that stress the incompetence and audacity of the author, containing almost nothing of interest to the reader of Acts. von Soden thought that this Euthalius is a transformed person, different from the deacon who wrote the first prologue. Between the two works, Euthalius seemed to have broken his back. What had happened? The solution, according to von Soden, was found in a document discovered by Wobbermin, one of his co-workers. Wobbermin had come across the Confession of Euthalius in an 11th cent. manuscript in Athos. The full title of the document is Εὐθαλίου ἐπισκόπου Σούλκης ὁμολογία περὶ τῆς ὀρθοδόξου πίστεως.96 von Soden declared triumphantly that this dis-

92

Harris 1896: 69. For an introduction to the conventions of the genre in late antiquity and medieval times, see H. Brinkmann 1964.

93

This probably refers to a translation of the Pauline letters from Greek into Syriac.

94

See von Dobschütz

o
ćF
RVFTUJPO
PG
UIF
SFMBUJPOTIJQ
CFUXFFO
UIF
WFSTJPOT
JT
BMTP
USFBUFE
in Brock 1979.

95

The reconstructed biography of Euthalius with the documents used for the reconstruction is found in von Soden

o

96
ćF
UFYU
JT
GPVOE
JO
"UIPT
-BXSB

GPM
o
ćF
GVMM
UFYU
PG
UIF
$POGFTTJPO
JT
QSJOUFE
JO
von Soden 
o

24

Introductory Issues

covery had put an end to the Penelopearbeit of earlier research.97 The piece purports to be a retraction of heretical views in the form of a confession. After a personal introduction, where Euthalius presents himself as ‘a humble man and a sinner, bishop of the most Holy Church of Sulci,’ he confesses his belief in the main trinitarian and Christological dogmas. He condemns monotheletism in particular, and regrets that he had been led by a certain John to sign an earlier heretical confession. This document also contains references to the first five ecumenical councils: From the Confession of Euthalius. Text in von Soden 1902: 640–641.

My translation

Οὓς δὲ ἀπεβάλλετο καὶ ἀποβάλλεται ὁ ἀποστολικὸς καὶ πρωτόθρονος τοῦ ἁγίου Πέτρου τοῦ ἀποστόλου ἤγουν ἡ ἁγία τοῦ θεοῦ καθολικὴ καὶ ἀποστολικὴ μεγάλη ἐκκλησία Ῥώμης κατέκρινεν ἢ κατακρίνει, ἀποβαλλόμεθα καὶ κατακρίνομεν· καὶ οὓς προσεδέξατο καὶ προσδέχεται, ἀσφαλῶς καὶ ἀνενδυάστως προσδεχόμεθα καὶ ὁμοπίστους ἡμῶν γινώσκομεν ἄνευ οἱάσουν ἀμφιβολίας, καὶ τοῖς μὴ οὕτως ὁμολογοῦσιν ἢ πιστεύουσιν ἢ κηρύττουσιν ἀνάθεμα ἔστω ἐκ τῆς ἀχράντου καὶ ζωοποιοῦ τριάδος τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος καὶ ἐκ τῆς ἁγίας καθολικῆς τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἀποστολικῆς ὀρθοδόξου ἐκκλησίας· ἀποδέχομαι δὲ καὶ περιπτύσσομαι τὰς ἁγίας καὶ οἰκουμενικὰς τέσσαρας συνόδους, τὴν ἐν Νικαίᾳ, τὴν ἐν Κωνσταντινουπόλει, τὴν ἐν Ἐφέσῳ τὸ πρότερον καὶ τὴν ἐν Χαλκηδόνι, πρὸς αὐταῖς καὶ τὴν ἐκ δευτέρου ἐν Κωνσταντινουπόλει γενομένην ἐπὶ τοῦ ἐν εὐσεβεῖ τῇ λήξει Ἰουστινιανοῦ τοῦ βασιλέως. προσδέχομαι δὲ μετὰ καὶ τούτων ἁπάντων καὶ τὴν ὑπὸ τοῦ ἐν ἀποστολικῇ τῇ μνήμῃ ἁγιωτάτου πάπα Μαρτίνου συναθροίσθησαν ἐν Ρώμῃ ἁγίαν σύνοδον ἐπὶ βεβαιώσει τῶν ὀρθοδόξων καὶ ἀποστολικῶν δογμάτων τῆς ἀμωμήτου ἡμῶν τῶν Χριστιανῶν πίστεως καὶ εἰς κατάκρισιν τῆς νέας θρασύτητος.

We reject and condemn all those whom the apostolic First Chair of the Holy Apostle Peter rejected and rejects, and all those whom the holy, catholic and apostolic Great Church of God condemned and condemns. And we accept firmly and without hesitation all those whom it accepted and accepts. We know them as our fellow-believers, without any doubt, and those who do not confess or believe or proclaim likewise, let them be anathematized from the pure and life-giving Trinity of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and from the holy, catholic and apostolic orthodox Church of God. I praise and accept the four holy ecumenical councils, the one in Nicaea, in Constantinople, the first in Ephesus, and in Chalcedon, in addition to these also the second council that took place in Constantinople under Justinian, who died as a pious man. I accept in addition to all these also the holy council that was assembled in Rome under Pope Martin, the most holy man in apostolic memory, a council assembled in order to confirm the orthodox and apostolic teachings of our, the Christians, blameless faith, and in order to condemn the recent rashness.

von Soden is convinced that the document is genuine because the name ‘Euthalius’ is unimportant in the dogmatic controversies of the period. If this argument is accepted, it is also possible to date the document with some accuracy. The council in Rome under Pope Martin was held in 648. Pope Martin himself died after a controversy in 655, so von Soden believed that the piece was written some time after this, in the late 7th century. As to the location of the document, certain linguistic details led him to identify the Sulci of Euthalius. The final paragraph of the Confession refers to the person who had seduced 97

See von Soden 1902: 638.

History of Research

25

Euthalius into signing the earlier confessionary document: an otherwise unknown John, who is referred to as ‘exceptor of the duchy’ (Ἰωάννης ὁ ἐκσκέπτωρ τῆς δουκιακῆς ἀρχῆς)—a duchy being a subdivision of the Byzantine exarchies, and exceptores being members of the duchy’s administration. Thus, since this John was an exceptor, and “Sulci” (on Sardinia) a city within a Byzantine exarchy, von Soden felt certain that he had found the Sulci of Euthalius on Sardinia.98 von Soden was not impressed by the contents of the Confession, saying that ‘what we have dug out is a monument made by a weak soul.’99 The signing of the heretical confession, and its later retraction were the painful events that had destroyed him. The discovery of the Confession was not the only new material that von Soden could offer. He also found the solution to an old problem in Euthalian scholarship: In minuscule 181, the main witness used by Zacagni in his edition, Zacagni had found in the end of a stichometrical list the mysterious phrase Καὶ τὸ πρὸς ἐμαυτὸν στίχοι κζ´. The text this phrase referred to, however, was not found in the manuscript. The problem was solved when another of von Soden’s co-workers, von der Goltz, found the following text on the island of Chalki:

98

See von Soden 1902: 643. This possibility had been considered already by Zacagni

MYJJoMYJW


XIP
rejected it because Euthalius wrote in Greek and rather seemed to be connected to the Church of Alexandria.

99

‘Es ist das Denkmal eines schwachen Geistes, das wir hier ausgegraben haben.’ von Soden 1902: 644.

26

Introductory Issues

The Πρὸς ἐμαυτόν of Euthalius. Text in von Soden 1902: 646–647.

My translation

Πρὸς ἐμαυτόν Τὰ πάντα πάντη καιρὸν ἔχει· ἀκμάζει γὰρ τὰ ἕκαστα καὶ λήγει παλιν. ἐν πᾶσιν δὲ ἀπάθεια μόνη νικᾶν ἔχει. ὑπεροπτικὸς τοίνυν μὴ γίνου, θυμέ, ταῖς εὐδοξίαις μηδὲ ταπεινὸς ταῖς δυστυχίαις. οὕτω γὰρ ἂν δίκαιος ἔσῃ τοῦ βίου ζυγοστάτης. οὐχ ἁπλαῖς οὐδ᾽ ἀσυνθέτοις συσκευαῖς ἐμπεπτώκαμεν ἀλλὰ δὴ πλεισταῖς καὶ πικραῖς και διαφόροις. τούτων ἡμῖν οὐδεὶς ἦν ὁ παρήγορος· πάντων γὰρ ἄρδην τῶν ἀγαθῶν ἡμεῖς ἐστηρήμεθα, πατρίδος ὁμοῦ καὶ δόξης καὶ περιουσίας, μόνην δ᾽ ἀρωγὸν εὗρον τῶν κακῶν την ἀναισθησίαν. πολλαῖσιν οὖν μοι συμφοραῖς προσομιλήσασα ψυχὴ, μὴ δὴ κάμῃ ἐμοί, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπόμεινον, φίλη. ὥσπερ γὰρ ἀρίστη ταῦτα εἰλονιζομένη καρτερήσεις, ὅτι οὐχ᾽ ὃ θέλει τις καὶ βούλεται δρᾷ, ἀλλ᾽ ὃ μὴ ζητεῖ καὶ φεύγεται. ὁ γὰρ θεῖος ὅρος τῶν πάντων κρατεῖν ἐμελέτησεν· εἶπεν δέ τις, εἶπεν ἡμῖν ὥδε ποιητικὸς στίχος· ἐλπίδες ἐν ζωοῖσιν, ἀνέλπιστοι δὲ θανόντες. οὐκοῦν τοὺς πάθους τλῆναι χρὴ καὶ γενναίως φέρειν; οὐδεὶς γὰρ οὐδὲν ἐστὶ τῶν ἐν βίῳ βροτῶν καὶ οὐδὲν ἐν ταὐτῷ γένει τῶν ἀνθρώπων. ὡς ἐν τροχῷ δὲ πάντα στρέφεται καὶ τρέχει ἄλλων· ταῦτ᾽ ἐγὼ πρὸς ἐμαυτὸν πάντα γράφω νῦν καὶ πρὸς ἑστίαν πατρὸς ἐμοῦ τὴν τρισαθλίαν Εὐθάλιος. οἴμοι τὴν μεταβολὴν ἐννοῶν, τῶν ἀνθρώπων δὲ πάντα ὡς ἄνθρωπος βλέπων μίαν ἔλιπον ἐμαυτῷ εὔπιστον ἐλπίδα, τὴν τοῦ θεοῦ μόνην μοι φιλανθρωπίαν. στίχων κζ´.

To Myself Everywhere, there is a time for every thing. For each thing will bloom and then disappear. In all, only indifference can prevail. Soul, do not be haughty in your happiness, and do not be abased in adversities. For thus you will with justice guard the equilibrium of life. I was not the victim of simple and straightforward schemes, no, of many different ones, cruel ones, and there was no one who helped me out of them. We were completely bereft of all benefits: homeland, honor and possessions, the only helper I found was indifference. My soul, you who have experienced so many misfortunes, do not grow weary, but, my friend, endure.a As the bravest you will endure if you keep this in your mind, because a man does not do what he wants and wishes for, but he does what he does not seek and what he tries to avoid. For the divine law has power over everything. And so goes a poetic line: ‘Hope is among the living, but the dead do not possess it.’b Should we not endure and carry our sufferings with dignity? For he who takes part in the life of mortals and belongs to mankind, is nothing. But as in a wheel, everything revolves and moves on. All this I, Euthalius, now write to myself and to the thrice-stricken house of my father. Woe is me, as I consider the change! Seeing the affairs of humans as a human being, I left for myself one hope in good faith, the one love of God for mankind. Twenty-seven lines.

a This translation was suggested to me by Jerker Blomqvist. b The line is Theocritus Idylls 4.42, see von Dobschütz 1899: 114.

It turned out that this piece corresponded to the Prayer of Euthalius which was known from Armenian manuscripts. The German translation of the Armenian printed by von Dobschütz is slightly different, and some of the personal elements of the Greek text are left out. This explains how the piece could appear as a kind of epilogue in the printed editions of the Armenian NT.100 von Soden used the Greek original of To Myself, the Confession, the Martyrdom, and the Euthalian prologues as if they were pieces in a puzzle. He considered the Martyrdom in its form without the Egyptian paragraph a part of the original edition of Euthalius.101 Moreover, since the use of the Syro-Macedonian calendar 100 On the Armenian version, see von Dobschütz

o
XJUI
USBOTMBUJPO
BOE
Conybeare (1904: 47). 101 For his view on the textual history of the Martyrdom, see von Soden

o

History of Research

27

in the Martyrdom connected Euthalius with the East, von Soden was able to reconstruct a biography of Euthalius with the following main points:102 Euthalius was a deacon in the East, possibly in Syrian Antioch, when he edited his volume of the Pauline letters, dedicated to an unknown father. After a controversy, Euthalius was forced to move to Sardinia. Here he signed an unorthodox confession. When he later made a retraction, in the form of the orthodox Confession that has come down to us, he was made bishop of Sulci on Sardinia as a reward. Only at that point, in order to rehabilitate himself completely, did he produce the volume of Acts and the Catholic letters. To Myself is a late, autobiographical product, which gives us intimate knowledge of the inner life of Euthalius after his many struggles. von Soden also had original views concerning the elements of the apparatus: While Zacagni and others had excluded the ὑποθέσεις using internal criteria, stressing the fact that they were not mentioned in the prologues, von Soden argued that the ὑποθέσεις with absolute certainty belonged to the original edition, as they occur in all the manuscripts. For similar reasons, he was willing to accept most of the material, including the Martyrdom, as genuine.103 Another aspect of von Soden’s work concerned the writing of the biblical text. von Soden believed that Euthalius divided the Acts and the Letters into sense-units simply by adding points in the text. In this view, he differs from earlier scholars.104 The edition of von Soden also departs from that of Zacagni in its order of presentation, since the ὑποθέσεις, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, and the prologues are treated separately. von Soden did not adopt the juxtaposition of ὑποθέσεις and κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, so common in the manuscripts, being convinced (like Zacagni) that separate traditions had been fused in the apparatus, and letting this insight determine the order of presentation. Thus the different genres of apparatus (κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, ὑποθέσεις, prologues) were separated in his edition. Conybeare soon raised objections against von Soden.105 While admitting that the discovery of the Confession represented a problem, he blamed von Soden for neglecting the work of Robinson. He argues that Robinson had shown that the Martyrdom is dependent on the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, and this made von Soden’s view untenable.106 Conybeare drew attention to the fact that the apparatus in the majority of manuscripts is anonymous, and that only a few identify the author as Euthalius bishop of Sulci. He also assumes that the apparatus was translated into Armenian in the middle of the 5th century. One reason for this assumption is the Armenian date given in the Martyrdom, where an Armenian translator has added the name of the Armenian month Margotz as a gloss on ‘June.’ According to Conybeare, 1 June fell on 1 Margotz in the year 448 AD, since only in that year were the months in exact alignment. Of course, the two months would partly DPWFS
FBDI
PUIFS
JO
UIF
QFSJPE
o
FOPVHI
GPS
BO
BVUIPS
UP
IBWF
HJWFO
BO
FTUJNBUF


102 See von Soden

o 103 See von Soden 1902: 657. The Martyrdom is considered genuine in the sense that it was included in the edition of Euthalius. Since it originated in 4th century, it belongs to the material that Euthalius inherited. 104 See von Soden 1902: 666. 105 See Conybeare 1904. 106 See Conybeare

o
6OGPSUVOBUFMZ
Conybeare does not here discuss the objections of Harris against the work of Robinson.

28

Introductory Issues

date), but Conybeare believes that the ‘middle date’ 448 is the most plausible.107 He also used Armenian sources in order to prove that Robinson’s dating of the Greek Euthalian material was correct. Some of this material had already been introduced in his previous work on Euthalius (see above). The earliest of the Armenian texts used by Conybeare is a 10th century manuscript containing a chronicle he ascribes to Ananias of Shirak (7th cent.).108 In this manuscript Euthalius is said to have published his volume of the Pauline letters in 396. Conybeare admits that this date evidently is based on the Martyrdom, and thus has no value as an independent source, but he wants to draw attention to the fact that the chronicle does record traditions about Euthalius at such an early date. Conybeare also introduced a rather late source, a commentary on Acts by the Armenian presbyter Matthew (1411).109 Here Euthalius is said to have produced the volume of the Pauline letters for Alexander, patriarch of Alexandria, who died shortly after the first Ecumenical Council of Nicaea. According to Conybeare, Matthew’s commentary was compiled from many sources including John Chrysostomos, Ephrem, and Michael the Syrian. He was, at that point, inclined to place confidence in this account, especially since Matthew seems to have information that is not found elsewhere. He gives an early date for Euthalius, and resists the assumption that Athanasius was the great Athanasius of Alexandria. The main point of Conybeare is that the Armenian traditions, though contradictory, prove that an early date for Euthalius is more accurate.110 In the same year, Theodor Zahn published an article on Euthalius where he criticized von Soden’s views.111 The essence of his criticism is similar to that of Conybeare: Zahn finds that the identification of Euthalius with the 7th century bishop has a weak foundation. He is willing to accept that a Greek from Syria may have become bishop of the mainly Latin-speaking church of Sulci on Sardinia in the second half of the 7th century. He finds it, however, unthinkable that this bishop could have failed to mention that his work on the biblical texts was made primarily for the benefit of the Greek churches in the East and not for his own community. In addition, Zahn could also draw attention to the fact that the Confession of Euthalius was known in the West even before von Soden published it: The Dominican friar Bonacursius of Bologna (13th cent.), who had lived 45 years in the Greek East, had quoted parts of this confession (in the original Greek and with Latin translation) in his Thesaurus veritatis fidei (c. 1275). Here, the Confession served as Greek evidence supporting the doctrine of the primacy of Rome.112 Zahn thinks that the ‘To Myself ’ is much closer to the Euthalian prologues. Here, he finds the same kind of rhythmic prose and a similar use of pagan authors.113 The most important texts are, according to Zahn, not the Confession or the ‘To Myself ’ but the Euthalian prologues and the Martyrdom. To him, the 4th cent. Martyrdom proves that the 7th century Confession was not 107 See Conybeare 1904: 50. The method of dating implies that this is an approximation only. 108 See Conybeare

o 109 See Conybeare

o 110 See Conybeare

o
BOE
Willard

o
o 111 Zahn 1904. 112 See Zahn

o 113 See Zahn 1904: 316.

History of Research

29

the work of the author of the apparatus. The Euthalian edition was made, according to Zahn, somewhere in Syria between 330 and 390 AD. The works of Conybeare and Zahn may be said to mark the end of the discussion that had followed after the publication on Codex H by Omont in 1890. After this period of intensive research came to an end, there have been relatively few studies on Euthalius. The Armenian work of Vardanian published in the 1920s was probably read by very few scholars in Europe. For this work, most scholars are dependent on the summary that Willard had acquired. Vardanian basically agrees with Conybeare regarding the date of the Armenian translation, which he places in the middle of the 5th century. His method of discerning between genuine and secondary elements of the apparatus is linguistic: only elements written in the classical language are considered genuine. On the basis of this criterion, he accepts the Martyrdom, but not the ὑποθέσεις. He also considers the Armenian colophon, The Voyage of Paul the Apostle to Rome, and The Travels of Paul as genuine writings.114 An important work of the subsequent period is Günther Zuntz’ The Ancestry of the Harklean New Testament which appeared in 1945. The focus of this study is not the apparatus, but the history of the Syriac NT. Zuntz’ main concern is to demonstrate close connections between the NT text of Pamphilus on the one hand, and the Philoxenian (508) and Harklean (616) versions on the other. He argues that the Euthalian elements were not a part of the Peshitta, but were introduced in the Philoxenian version. He reconstructs the Greek text of a colophon in the Philoxenian version, and finds that the first half of this colophon is identical with that of Codex H and min. 88 (without the dialogue), while its second half is identical with the summary of the Euthalian lection list of the Letters of Paul.115 He finds that this indicates that these manuscripts are interdependent, and, further, that this interdependence is related to the library of Caesarea where the colophon was originally a guarantee of authenticity of copies issued from the Caesarean scriptorium.116 The apparatus was thus a Caesarean product, and Pamphilus was the originator of the work. ‘Euthalius’ is only a pseudonym of an author who was not particularly creative, since only the prologues were his own. Besides, ‘Euthalius’ had distributed the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι in his copy, so that they appear before the text of each letter.117 Other aspects of Zuntz’ work should be mentioned: He placed the apparatus within the larger context of Greco-Roman literary culture, introducing parallels to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the ὑποθέσεις.118 He also discussed the arrangement of the biblical text against the background of ancient scribal practices.119 114 For a detailed summary of the work of Vardanian, see Willard

o
o 115 For the reconstructed text of this colophon, see Zuntz 1945: 77. 116 See Zuntz 1945: 87. 117 See Zuntz 1945: 83. In a later study, Zuntz has conjectured that ‘Euthalius’ is a pseudonym for Euzoios, and that the name of the dedicatee Athanasius also is a pseudonym. Behind ‘Athanasius’ stands Acacios. Both are associated with the Library of Caesarea in the 4th century. For this conjecture, see Zuntz 1953. 118 See Zuntz

o 119 See Zuntz

o
ćJT
BTQFDU
PG
Zuntz’ work may be considered a development of Harris’ work on stichometry (Harris 1883).

30

Introductory Issues

In 1970, Willard finished A Critical Study of the Euthalian apparatus, an important dissertation for Euthalian studies. Willard noted that the secondary literature was partly disconnected; some authors had apparently been writing without sufficient knowledge of previous research. For this reason, he collected and summarized material from all relevant fields, including the Armenian and Syriac versions. In his views on the origin and development of the apparatus, Willard tends to agree with Zuntz, as he considers the apparatus a Caesarean product of the 4th century.120 Willard acknowledged that an English translation of the apparatus was needed, and made an annotated translation of the Prologue to the Letters of Paul.121 In an appended survey of more than 400 manuscripts, he gave detailed information of their contents, which was a first step towards a new critical edition. Dahl, who had acted as 8JMMBSET
TVQFSWJTPS
BU
:BMF
SFUVSOFE
UP
UIF
BQQBSBUVT
JO
BO
BSticle published in 2000.122 Dahl demonstrated that the apparatus contained a meta-terminology that was very sophisticated, indebted to ancient rhetorical theory and suggestive of modern-day pragmatics.123 While earlier commentators had focused on the identity of Euthalius, Dahl studied the function of the apparatus in a wider context, as a source document for the history of piety. He suggested that the apparatus may have been used by lay people, and thus could give an impression of how Paul was read in wider circles. He also wrote a sketch of the teachings of the apparatus, and showed that this was a neglected subject worthy of study.124 Inspired by the work of Dahl, David Hellholm and I published in 2004 a study of the metalanguage of the apparatus, focusing on the term παραίνεσις.125 This was the first study exclusively devoted to the content of the apparatus. After defining the concept ‘genre-designation’ by means of ancient and modern text-theory, we argued that παραίνεσις and its cognates appear as genre-designations in the apparatus.126 This has special interest, as the term parainesis is not a genre-designation in the NT. Our article was thus an attempt to answer the question of when this genre-designation gained currency within the church. In a recent study, Simon Crisp has returned to the question of how the biblical text was arranged.127 The study of Crisp uses a comparative method to throw light on the arrangement of the text in Euthalian editions. Crisp compares major section breaks in various Pauline manuscripts (H D F G 1243 1891 1720) and finds that the manuscripts represent a relatively stable tradition.

120 See Willard 1970: 175/2009: 131. 121 See Willard

o
o 122 See Dahl 2000d. 123 See Dahl 2000d: 257. 124 See Dahl
E

BOE
o 125 See D. Hellholm/V. Blomkvist 2004 (App. II). 126 See Hellholm/Blomkvist

o
BOE
o 127 See S. Crisp 2005.

History of Research

31

2.2. Conclusions At the beginning of the preceding section, four major themes in the history of research were highlighted. After this survey of the history of research, the following conclusions may be drawn: The first is the question of authorship. This topic is impossible to separate from the other main theme—the question of which elements of the apparatus should be considered genuine. Two texts that have received much attention by scholars regarding these questions are the Martyrdom and the colophon of Codex H. The Martyrdom is often quoted as evidence for the date of Euthalius, as this is the only document in the apparatus that has references to specific years. The problem is how to interpret this material. The view of Zacagni, that the author of the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is identical with the author of the Martyrdom, has a weak foundation, and is rejected by most scholars.128 The hypothesis of Robinson regarding the Martyrdom, that this text is based on the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, has been accepted by many. Zuntz considered this the ‘most brilliant achievement of Robinson’s justly famous Euthaliana.’129 It is my view that Zuntz at this point neglected the arguments of Harris, who argued that Eusebius is the source behind both the Prologue to the Letters of Paul and the Martyrdom. The arguments of Harris are worthy of consideration. His model of influence, where the text of Eusebius stands as a source for both the Prologue to the Letters of Paul and the Martyrdom, is an attractive explanation of literary relations between the texts. Moreover, it is supported by the explicit references to Eusebius in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul. Thus, it should not be taken for granted that the Martyrdom belongs to the time after Euthalius. The colophon of Codex H has also been very important for the question of authorship. It occurs in an early manuscript and may for this reason be evidence for an early date of Euthalius. The important question is whether the colophon is dependent on Euthalius or not. It is my view that the arguments of von Dobschütz and Robinson for the dependence of the colophon on Euthalius are convincing. It appears that the ‘we’ in the Euthalian parallel material has been changed to ‘I’ in the colophon. If literary dependence is assumed, the question remains of how this dependence should be explained. Robinson conjectured that both the Martyrdom and the colophon belonged to an editio minor of the apparatus, but this view seems unfounded. Willard finds that the colophon represents an eclectic production similar to that of the Martyrdom, but does not attempt to establish a link between the two texts. Willard’s interpretation at this point seems the most convincing: namely, that just because the two texts both can be characterized as eclectic products, this in itself does not establish any historical link between them. The evidence of Codex H, as well as the early translation of the apparatus into Syriac, Armenian and Georgian make the late date that von Soden assigns to Euthalius impossible to defend. Still, the Confession of Euthalius is an enigmatic document: There is a connection between it and the titles of the Euthalian prologues transmitted in a number of manuscripts—the con128 Zacagni’s view is supported in the work of Wettstein (1752: 73), M. Islinger (1867: 5) and von Dobschütz (1893: 68). von Dobschütz later came to reject Zacagni’s view, see von Dobschütz 1899: 137 n.1. 129 Zuntz 1945: 79 n. 2.

32

Introductory Issues

nection being the name ‘Euthalius’ and the reference to him as ‘bishop of Sulci.’ Scholars have rightly pointed out that the apparatus in the majority of manuscripts has been transmitted without a name. We are apparently left with two possibilities: (1) That Euthalius bishop of Sulci was an historical person of the 7th century whose name for some reason became associated with the apparatus at a later stage. Different explanations may be given. Conybeare suggests that the name ‘Euthalius’ was in the tradition already before the 7th century. About 670 AD a Euthalius, bishop of Sulci, became well-known, and scribes after 700 AD expanded the tradition by adding the words ‘bishop of Sulci.’130 Dahl, on the other hand, considers the possibility that the 7th century bishop of Sulci presented a restored edition of the apparatus, with original and secondary elements combined.131 This would explain why this name appears only in a small group of manuscripts. (2) That the Confession is not an historical document, but a pseudonymous work written in the name of Euthalius. von Soden rejects this, as it is very hard to imagine why anybody should write in the name of an author who is so obscure. This argument of von Soden is convincing. The Confession should be considered an authentic historical document. As to the question of how the name ‘Euthalius’ was associated with the apparatus, it seems best to withhold judgment. The other text that von Soden introduced, To Myself, represents another genre. von Dobschütz has aptly characterized its style as that of Ecclesiastes, and this text can not be used as a source for the life of Euthalius. Even if von Soden’s reconstruction of the life of Euthalius is rejected as speculative, it should be remembered that he made some important observations. His point of departure was the observation that the style of the Prologue to the Letters of Paul and that of the Prologue to Acts differs markedly from each other, a fact which has not received much attention by scholars. It must be admitted that the question of authorship is a difficult subject at the present stage of research. Scholars have frequently referred to two theological schools of UIPVHIU
ćF
ĕSTU
JT
UIF
MJOF
PG
0SJHFO
o
1BNQIJMVT
o
&VTFCJVT
ćJT
BTTPDJBUFT
UIF
BQparatus with Caesarea and its library. It has been suggested that the bulk of the apparatus may go back to Origen or his school. The theory that Evagrius Ponticus, who was condemned as an Origenist, was the author of the apparatus, also belongs here. The other line often referred to by scholars is that of Theodore of Mopsuestia and Nestorius. This theory draws the apparatus into the sphere of Nestorianism. Possibly, a detailed analysis of the apparatus may confirm some of these hypotheses. The second main theme, the question of the genuine elements, has already been introduced with respect to the Martyrdom. The most important of the disputed elements is the series of ὑποθέσεις. Here, the edition of Zacagni has exerted a great influence, since Zacagni included a large amount of material in the Euthalian apparatus, taking the comprehensive manuscript 181 as his model codex. Even if Zacagni himself did not consider the ὑποθέσεις part of the original editions, their inclusion in the print has constantly associated them with Euthalius. Scholars after Zacagni have often tried to reduce the Euthalian apparatus by isolating certain elements as the original ones. Here Robinson is the most radical critic. At the other end of the spectrum stands von Soden, who accepted 130 See Conybeare 1904: 45. 131 See Dahl 2000d: 253 n74.

Aim and Structure of the Study

33

even the ὑποθέσεις. The question reflects a methodological problem in textual criticism. Robinson may be said to emphasize the internal evidence: Only elements that are referred to in the prologues should be considered genuine. von Soden, on the other hand, argues on the basis of the manuscripts. According to his view, the inclusion of the ὑποθέσεις in the majority of manuscripts points to their being genuine. The question of genuine elements also includes the lection lists and the collection of testimonies and other minor pieces. The evidence of the Armenian and Syriac versions seems to confirm Robinson’s critical view on the ὑποθέσεις, but they do not confirm his radicalism at every point. At the present stage of research, it is difficult to approach these questions because we still do not have a critical edition of the apparatus reflecting today’s scholarly standards.132 The manuscript survey of Willard offers an excellent overview of the tradition, but the form of the text in the majority of manuscripts is unfortunately not described. The third main theme, the question of how the biblical text was arranged by Euthalius, is still unresolved. Most scholars believe that the text was arranged in sense-lines, and that Codex H represents a variant of the original editions. von Soden, on the other hand, has advocated the view that the sense-lines were expressed only by points in the text. If each line in the original editions was also a sense-line, the question is why only one exemplar, Codex H, has survived. A plausible solution is that these manuscripts were quite expensive to produce, and that, for this reason, the tradition was continued by using punctuation. For this reason as well, a new edition of Euthalius would be helpful. A full treatment of punctuation, however, cannot be given at the present stage. The fourth main theme is the question of how the apparatus has transformed the biblical texts by using rhetorical and epistolographic vocabulary. Zuntz noted that the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is the work of a stylist versed in Greek paideia, and Birdsall noted that the apparatus can teach us much about how rhetorical methods were applied to biblical texts.133 The close link between the terminology of the apparatus and ancient epistolographic handbooks was discussed by Dahl, and Hellholm and I have developed this theme further in our study of the term παραίνεσις in the apparatus.

3. Aim and Structure of the Study 3.1. The Euthalian Apparatus and the Biblical Text The aim of the present commentary is to describe the relationship between the Euthalian apparatus and the biblical texts. This focus separates the present commentary from most earlier studies on the apparatus. From the preceding sketch of the history of research, one may learn that the focus has been on the isagogic questions: ‘Who was Euthalius, where and when did he live?’ The fact that Euthalius himself was an isagogic writer on the NT has not stimulated much research. The studies by Dahl, Hellholm and myself seem to be the few exceptions. The present commentary develops this theme further by focusing on 132 Scholars will welcome the new edition of Euthalius planned by David C. Parker and Simon Crisp in Birmingham. 133 Zuntz 1945: 81; Birdsall 1984/2006: 215.

34

Introductory Issues

the apparatus as a ‘meta-text’ vis-a-vis its ‘pre-text’, i.e. the apostolic writings of the New Testament.134 Thus, the pre-text appears in the present commentary together with the Euthalian texts since the Euthalian apparatus cannot be properly understood without it. The reader will therefore find a double lemma adopted throughout the commentary. In most cases, the entire pre-text cannot be reproduced, but its opening words are always quoted. The motivation for studying the Euthalian apparatus as a meta-text is my interest in the history of the reception of the New Testament.135 The presence of Euthalian matter in a large number of NT manuscripts is generally not recognized but suggests that these texts once were important for readers of the NT. The scribes, as von Dobschütz suggested,136 may have considered the apparatus to be a part of the biblical text, just as readers of modern bible editions today may accept the divisions, headings and arrangement of the text as an integral part of the Bible. The importance of the apparatus for the study of the reception of the NT has therefore been neglected and the present study is an attempt to re-establish the Euthalian apparatus as an important source-text for the history of interpretation. It should be remembered that this study cannot pay attention to all aspects of the apparatus, since some aspects of the work of Euthalius can no longer be reconstructed. One of his most important tasks, namely, his work aiming at a clear and correct pronunciation of the pre-text, remains obscure. We may understand the nature of this task but only conjecture exactly how he wanted the biblical text to sound. We may suppose that this knowledge was lost at an early stage due to the development of the Greek language. The commentary does not make any attempt to reconstruct it. The student who wants a more complete picture of how the Euthalian editions appeared to their readers will have to read the apparatus together with the complete biblical texts. One could possibly wish for a commentary on the complete biblical text with the Euthalian apparatus. But the reader who has some knowledge of New Testament scholarship must admit that such an endeavor would be too ambitious and probably not worth the effort: The secondary literature on the NT is immense and cannot be compared to the relatively few works that exist on Euthalius. It would for this reason be difficult to write a commentary that would meet scholarly standards with respect both to the biblical pretext and the Euthalian meta-text. The solution adopted here is therefore to presuppose a general knowledge of the biblical texts and instead to focus on points where the apparatus presents something new or unexpected. In these instances, and in these only, is the pretext reproduced with references to a selection of NT commentaries.

3.2. The Sequence and Style of the Present Commentary An initial difficulty for a student of the Euthalian apparatus is the fact that it is transmitted in various forms. Apart from the problem of establishing the text (see below) there is the more serious problem of how the apparatus appeared to its readers: Which ele134 On the useful term pre-text, see W. Raible 1995: 53, S. Alkier 2003 and A. Merz

o
S. Holthuis (1993: 18) also uses the terms ‘Ursprungstext’ and ‘Initialtext’ but the short ‘pre-text’ is preferred in the present commentary. 135 Cf. the new series Novum Testamentum Patristicum (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht 2007ff.). The first volume is M. Meiser 2007. 136 See von Dobschütz 1899: 154.

Aim and Structure of the Study

35

ments were included? The main genres of the apparatus may appear together in different constellations, the most common being the juxtaposition of ὑποθέσεις and κεφάλαιατίτλοι.137 Already at this stage, we may assume that they contain different descriptions of the pre-text. The reader with access to an apparatus with ὑποθέσεις may get an impression of the pre-text that is quite different from that of a reader who has another form of the apparatus, such as the complete collection in min. 181. It would be possible to write a commentary on the Euthalian apparatus on the basis of this single, comprehensive manuscript (such as 181) where all the elements of the apparatus appear together JO
UIF
TFRVFODF
"DUT
o
$BUIPMJD
MFUUFST
o
1BVMJOF
MFUUFST
*O
UIJT
NBOVTDSJQU
UIF
HFOSFT
are not separated: a prologue introduces each of the three main sections, and ὑποθέσεις and κεφάλαια-τίτλοι are joined together and prefixed to each biblical book, where they belong. This solution has not been adopted in the present commentary, where the focus is not on single manuscripts but rather on the tradition they transmit. This tradition appears in a variety of forms and the problem is how to write a commentary on the apparatus that pays attention to this state of affairs. The method adopted here is to treat the three main genres (κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, ὑποθέσεις and πρόλογοι) separately. With the material thus presented, the reader of the present commentary should keep in mind that the presentation is artificial and made for the sake of clarity. This both provides a good overview of the tradition and has the advantage of not limiting the study to one particular ‘constellation’ of materials. Future studies on the apparatus may choose to focus on single manuscripts. Thus, the different elements of the apparatus are compared only in the final conclusion. The sequence of the genres does not reflect any historical development but is based on the relationship the genres have to the pre-text: The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι are mainly text-internal, i.e. they do not treat the communicative situation of the NT writings. They are for this reason placed first. The ὑποθέσεις follow these since they are both text-internal and text-external with regard to the NT writings: They know, e.g., where Paul was when he wrote the letters and why he wrote them. Finally, the πρόλογοι are treated. Parts of the πρόλογοι are meta-texts not only vis-a-vis the biblical text but also vis-a-vis the apparatus itself, since they contain also information about ‘Euthalius’ and how readers should use his edition. The style of the present commentary is not uniform but has different emphases dependent on the different genres of the Euthalian apparatus: (1) The commentary on the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι focuses on the meta-terminology (such as ‘prayer’ or ‘paraenesis’) and is not divided into sections that correspond to each biblical book. The reasons for this choice is that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι do not form a continuous text, but are rather short titles where the meta-terminology is of the greatest importance. Thus, it seemed reasonable to write a commentary on this material that focused on the meta-terms. (2) The commentary on the ὑποθέσεις is different. In this section, it was considered necessary to discuss each biblical book separately, since the ὑποθέσεις are continuous texts that have much to say on the communicative situation of the pre-texts. The meta-terminology is also discussed here but only at the various points where the meta-terms occur. The seRVFODF
GPMMPXFE
IFSF
JT
UIBU
PG
1BVMJOF
MFUUFST
o
$BUIPMJD
MFUUFST
o
"DUT
*U
XPVME
PG
DPVSTF
be possible to treat Acts before the Letters but this procedure seems unnatural because of the marginal role Acts plays in the Euthalian apparatus. Only the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι give a 137 See the manuscript survey in Willard

o
o
BOE
Dahl (2000d: 265).

36

Introductory Issues

picture of Acts that has some substance. The material pertaining to Acts in the ὑποθέσεις and πρόλογοι is very superficial. Possibly, this material was compiled at a late stage in PSEFS
UP
DSFBUF
TZNNFUSZ
JO
UIF
BQQBSBUVT
ćF
TFRVFODF
1BVMJOF
MFUUFST
o
$BUIPMJD
MFUUFST
o
"DUT
IBT
CFFO
DIPTFO
PO
UIF
CBTJT
PG
NBOVTDSJQU
FWJEFODF
*U
IBT
CFFO
DIPTFO
JO
UIJT
study in order to keep the letters together. (3) The commentary on the πρόλογοι offers a commentary on the Euthalian prologues section by section. The same sequence as in the DPNNFOUBSZ
PO
UIF
аɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
JT
GPMMPXFE
IFSF
1BVMJOF
MFUUFST
o
$BUIPMJD
MFUUFST
o
"DUT 
The πρόλογοι contain a double set of meta-terms, one treating the biblical texts as pretext, the other treating the apparatus itself as pre-text. This terminology is discussed at various points where the terms occur.

3.3. Themes of the Commentary 3.3.1. The Pre-text The pre-text in the case of the Euthalian apparatus is the Letters and Acts. There is however no consensus regarding what text-type the apparatus reflects. For a long period after Zacagni, the biblical text of his main witness 181 was referred to as the ‘Euthalian’ text although Wettstein early had demonstrated the absurdity of this idea.138 It is well known that a commentary manuscript may often reproduce one particular text-form in the lemma while the commentary itself clearly presupposes another text-form. A similar replacement may have occurred also in the Euthalian manuscripts. The present state of research into the textual history of the Euthalian manuscripts, however, does not allow us to draw any conclusions regarding the exact form of the pre-text of the apparatus. Given the diverse character of the apparatus, one may also suspect that different text-types are involved. The apparatus may have originated at different places and may for this reason reflect local variations. In the present commentary, the Nestle-Aland text has served as a starting point since this is the text form that is widely used today. It is reproduced together with corresponding passages of the apparatus but important textual variants in the pre-text are given in brackets. This priority given to the Nestle-Aland text in the present commentary does not imply that this text should be identified as the pre-text of the apparatus. The present commentary may occasionally make conjectures regarding the pre-text on purely internal grounds, but this is not a main concern. 3.3.2. The Meta-terminology of the Apparatus The entire apparatus is a meta-text in respect of the biblical text, and for this reason, the meta-terminology contained in the apparatus is of special interest. The logician Willard Quine has pointed out that there are basically two different types of meta-texts. The one way to create a meta-text is to use the text to designate itself, i.e. to present it as a quotation. The other way is to make a substitution, i.e., describe it with another text. Both these types are found in the Euthalian apparatus.139 According to Quine, 138 See Wettstein 1752: 75 and above on the history of research. 139 The quotation type is found primarily in the list of testimonies. These were probably not intended to be read as a ‘Book of Testimonies’ independently of the pre-text, but as texts having a scholarly purpose.

Aim and Structure of the Study

37

‘a quotation is not a description, but a hieroglyph; it designates its object not by describing it in terms of other objects, but by picturing it.140 Thus any word may be used on a meta-level to designate itself. The discussion of this phenomenon in the Syntax of Apollonius Dyscolus shows that it could represent a real difficulty for the ancient grammarians. Apollonius noticed that the Greek article could be used with any part of speech, as in his example τὸ λέγε προστατικόν ἐστι ‘λέγε is imperative’. His solution was to supply a meta-term like ῥῆμα immediately after the article: τὸ ῥῆμα λέγε προστατικόν ἐστι ‘the verb λέγε is imperative.’ In this way the grammarian could connect the article to ῥῆμα, and the difficulty was overcome. Apollonius did however perceive that λέγε in the above example signified nothing more than the word itself.141 The neuter article may be considered a marker analogous to our quotation marks.142 The meta-term ῥῆμα refers here to a single word, and belongs to the discipline of grammar in a narrow sense. The ancient grammarians were also occupied with the classification of sentences, and this discipline has points of contact with the study of literature. A common typology in the Aristotelian tradition is thus summarized by Ammonius (5/6th cent):143 However, there are five kinds of sentence (εἴδη τοῦ λόγου), namely the Vocative (κλητικός), as in: ‘O happy Son of Atreus’, the Imperative (προστακτικός), as in: ‘Go! Away, swift Iris!’, the Interrogative (ἐρωτηματικός), as in: ‘Who and from where are you?’, the Optative (εὐκτικός), as in: ‘If only, Father Zeus…’, and last of all the assertoric (ἀποφαντικός), by which we make an assertion about anything at all, for example: ‘But gods know all things’, ‘All soul is immortal’. (Transl. David Blank) One may observe in the quotation above that the classification of sentences is closely related to the grammatical terminology used to describe cases and moods. Thus the λόγος κλητικός corresponds to πτῶσις κλητική ‘the vocative case.’ Similarly, the λόγος προστακτικός has the verb in the imperative mood (ἔγκλισις προστακτική), and the λόγος εὐκτικός uses the optative (ἔγκλισις εὐκτική). The λόγος ἀποφαντικός and the λόγος ἐρωτηματικός have no counterpart in the verbal system. The terms are intended as descriptions of sentences, but they may also be considered meta-terms for different speech acts.144 A classification of letters based on speech acts is found in the epistolographic

They identify the OT quotations in the pre-text by reproducing them. On these lists, see Willard 1970: o
o 140 W. Quine 1951/76: 26. 141 Apollonius Dyscolus, Syntax, 1,37. 142 This use of the article is found also in the NT, e.g. τὸ Ἄγαρ in Gal 4:25. Cf. also the corresponding use of the Greek article in Latin scientific prose, where the Greek article has the same function as our quotation marks. 143 Ammonius in his commentary (2, 9) on De interpretatione of Aristole. Transl. David Blank in Sorabij 
o 144 After referring to the canonical scheme of five types, Ammonius criticizes the Stoics for their more complex system. In addition to the assertoric, optative and vocative types, they had added five others, the swearing type (ὀμοτικός), the positing type (ἐκθετικός), the hypothetical type (ὑποθετικός), the quasidecision (ὅμοιος ἀξιώματι), and the dubitative type (ἐπαπορητικός). This system is less dependent on morphological categories, and is rather a classification of different functions or speech acts; see R. Sorabij 2004: 244.

38

Introductory Issues

handbooks that have come down to us. In Typi epistolares, a work ascribed to Demetrius, twenty-one letter types are listed, among which we find the τύπος ἐρωτηματικός: Pseudo-Demetrius, Typi epistolares, 13

Translated by Malherbe 1988: 39

Ἐρωτηματικός. ὅταν περί τινος πυνθανόμενοι παρακαλῶμεν ἡμῖν ἀντιφωνῆσαι. οἷον· Ἀκούω τὸν δεῖνα ἐπιδεδημηκέναι πρὸς σέ. διασάφησον οὖν μοι πότερον ἔτι πάρεστιν ἢ κεχώρισται.

It is the enquiring type when we inquire about something and urge that a reply be sent to us. For example: I hear that So-and-so has been staying with you. Please let me know, therefore, whether he is still there or whether he has left.

This letter type thus corresponds to the λόγος ἐρωτηματικός in the typology of sentences. Similarly, the handbook describes a letter type as ἀποφαντικός, which corresponds to the λόγος ἀποφαντικός. Malherbe translates this as the ‘responding type,’ which makes it difficult to see the connection between the grammatical and epistolographic terminology at this point. Pseudo-Demetrius, Typi epistolares, 14

Translated by Malherbe 1988: 39

Ἀποφαντικός ἐστι τὸ πρὸς τὸν πυνθανόμενον ἀποφαίνεσθαι. οἷον· Ἔγραψάς μοι πυνθανόμενος εἰ παρ᾽ ἡμῖν ὁ δεῖνα. πάρεστιν οὖν ἔτι καὶ σὲ προσδεχόμενος ἐπιμενεῖν φησιν.

The responding type responds to the person NBLJOH
BO
JORVJSZ
'PS
FYBNQMF
:PV
XSPUF
NF
asking whether So-and-so was with us. He still is, and furthermore says that he expects to wait until you arrive.

A similar terminology is also found in the De forma epistolari, a work ascribed to Libanius. Here, a genre called ευκτικη occurs. His example is the following: Pseudo-Libanius, De forma epistolari, 59

Translated by Malherbe 1988: 74

Εὐκτική. Εἴθε μοι τὸ θεῖον παράσχοι τὴν σὴν ἱερὰν θεάσασθαι μορφήν, ἧς ἀπολαῦσαι πάλαι ἐλπίζω διηνεκῶς εὐχὰς ὑπὲρ τούτου ποιούμενος τῷ κρείττονι.

The prayerful letter. May God grant that I behold your holy form, in which I have hoped to delight. For this I constantly offer my prayers to almighty God.

The example illustrates the overlap between the grammatical and epistolographic metaterms with regard to this letter type. The first verb (παράσχοι) is in the optative mood (ἔγκλισις εὐκτική), the first sentence in the letter is a λόγος εὐκτικός, and the entire letter is classified as εὐκτική. There is however a limited number of literary meta-terms that can be connected to a single grammatical category. In the majority of cases, the use of the meta-term represents an interpretation of the text which presupposes a general knowledge of genres. In the quotation above from Pseudo-Libanius the introductory phrase ‘The prayerful letter’ corresponds to a heading to the following letter-text. Thus it may be labeled a substitution for the text of the letter. The linguists Elisabeth Gülich and Wolfgang Raible label this kind of substitution ‘substitution on meta-level.’ This form of substitution does not necessarily contain any deictic elements relating to the circumstances of the writer or reader.145 The substitution on meta-level may therefore be considered a text-deicticon.146 145 See E. Gülich/Raible

o
Hellholm

o 146 See Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004: 468 (App. II, page 300).

Aim and Structure of the Study

39

They have the function of guiding the reader in the interpretation of the text. Such substitutions are not necessarily headings. They may also be an organic part of the text. Thus, JO
3PN

Ъ
ϪϟϨϟϮϧϯϪч϶
ϭжϰϭ϶
SFGFST
UP
UIF
QSFDFEJOH
RVPUBUJPO
JO
o
ćF
TVCTUJUVtion on meta-level is most often manifested in nominal form. A verbal form may also occur. Hellholm has showed that the verb εἶδον placed at the beginning of a section in an apocalyptic text may function as a substitution on meta-level. The verb εἶδον ‘I saw’ corresponds to a nominal form such as ὅρασις, ‘vision’.147 This is seen in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι that Andreas of Caesarea wrote for the Apocalypse. Andreas refers to 3FW
o
BT
ὀπτασία ἐν ᾗ τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐθεάσατο ἐν μέσῳ λυχνίων ἑπτά, where the εἶδον of the pre-text (1:12) is represented both by ὀπτασία and ἐθεάσατο in the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος.148 Another phenomenon is the explicit reference to the communicative situation. This may be illustrated by Acts 1:1 Τὸν μὲν πρῶτον λόγον ἐποιησάμην περὶ πάντων, ὦ Θεόφιλε κτλ. This is labeled a ‘meta-communicative clause’.149 It may refer to the communication between author and reader, or to communication on various levels in the text. In Acts 2:14 the speech of Peter is introduced by the meta-communicative clause ἐπῆρεν τὴν φωνὴν αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀπεφθέγξατο αὐτοῖς. Within this speech, still another level of communication is introduced by the clause Δαυὶδ γὰρ λέγει εἰς αὐτόν (Acts 2:25). The metacommunicative clause may contain a substitution on meta-level. This is the case in the example above from Acts 1:1, where τὸν πρῶτον λόγον designates the Gospel of Luke. It may also use a single deictic pronoun, such as ταῦτα, as in Acts 26:24 ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ ЋɀϭϩϭϡϭϱϪтϫϭϱ
XIFSF
ϰϟѼϰϟ
SFGFST
UP
UIF
TQFFDI
JO
o
*O
UIJT
DBTF
ϰϟѼϰϟ
JT
B
TVCstitution on abstraction-level.150 A previous study by Hellholm and myself examined the term παραίνεσις. In that study, the language of the apparatus was compared to the different pre-texts.151 This case was particularly interesting, since here the meta-term used to describe the pre-text is not found in the pre-text itself. The approach of Hellholm and myself in this previous study is adopted in the present commentary. As a first step, the motivation for the use of the term is identified in the pre-text. The most common motivations are the following: 1. A meta-communicative clause in the pre-text Pre-text (1IJM
o 

ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰҀ
ϰҁ
Ϧϣҁ
Κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Phil I: εὐχαριστία ὑπὲρ τῆς μου ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ μνείᾳ ὑμῶν … καὶ τοῦτο Φιλιππησίων ἀρετῆς, καὶ εὐχὴ τελειώσεως. προσεύχομαι (v.9)

In the example above, the verbs found in the pre-text are represented by their cognate nouns in the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος. There is only an apparent change from προσεύχομαι (προσευχή) in the pre-text to εὐχή in the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος. One should also note that the meta-communicative clauses in the pre-text may be replaced by other terms in the apparatus. Thus, the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 3 John I has ὁμολογία φιλοξενίας τῶν ἀδελφῶν διὰ 147 See Hellholm 1986: 47. 148 Text in von Soden 1902: 472. 149 See Gülich/Raible

o
Hellholm

o 150 See Hellholm

o 151 See Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004 (App. II).

40

Introductory Issues

Χριστόν. Here, the term ὁμολογία represents μαρτυρέω in the pre-text: οἳ ἐμαρτύρησάν σου τῇ ἀγάπῃ ἐνώπιον ἐκκλησίας (1:6). 2. The use of a particular mood in the pre-text Pre-text (
ćFTT
 

Ъ
Ϣс
ϨъϮϧϭ϶
ϨϟϰϣϱϦъϫϟϧ
Κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 2 Thess IV, second ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας εἰς τὴν ἀγάπην τοῦ θεοῦ ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος: εὐχὴ ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν εἰς ἀγάπην θεοῦ

This type of motivation is common where the pre-text uses the optative. When the optative verb has θεός or κύριος as subject, the text is often described as a prayer. This classification of a subsection thus corresponds to the description of the prayerful letter in Pseudo-Libanius. The use of mood is also an important motivation for a group of metaterms that describe imperatival sentences, such as παραίνεσις, προτροπή and ἀποτροπή. Thus in the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 2 Thess IV, παράκλησις εὐχῆς ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἔργου, the noun παράκλησις reflects the use of the imperative in the pre-text: προσεύχεσθε, ἀδελφοί, περὶ ἡμῶν (3:1). 3. The apparatus uses a meta-term that is not found in the pre-text Pre-text (1IJM
o 

ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰҀ
ϰҁ
Ϧϣҁ
Ὑπόθεσις of Phil: καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἀποδέχεται μου ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ μνείᾳ ὑμῶν...μάρτυς γάρ μου αὐτῶν τὴν πίστιν, καὶ σημαίνει μνημονεύειν ὁ θεὸς ὡς ἐπιποθῶ πάντας ὑμᾶς ἐν σπλάγχνοις αὐτῶν. Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ (v.8)

The pre-text cannot be determined with certainty, but it seems to correspond to the preUFYU
JO
UIF
ĕSTU
FYBNQMF
BCPWF
1IJM
o 
ćF
DPOUSBTU
JO
UFSNJOPMPHZ
CFUXFFO
UIF
κεφάλαιον-τίτλος and the ὑπόθεσις is striking. In the ὑπόθεσις, the thanksgiving is interpreted as praise of the Philippians. The act of prayer is not mentioned. Instead the focus is on Paul’s remembrance of the addressees. Thus, other aspects of the texts are emphasized. The different transformations may be clearly perceived when the pre-texts and various auxiliary materials are brought together and analyzed as a system. 3.3.3. The Apparatus as Paraphrase In the present study, the term ‘paraphrase’ is used in a wide sense to designate any reformulation of the pre-text that goes beyond the mere genre-designation or meta-term. Thus, in the example quoted above from the chapter list of Andreas of Caesarea, the metaterm ὀπτασία introduces a short paraphrase of the pre-text, ἐν ᾗ τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐθεάσατο ἐν μέσῳ λυχνίων ἑπτά.152 In his study of the different types of commentary, Wolfgang Raible distinguishes between texts that represent a reduction of the pre-text, the creation of a parallel text, and those that represent an amplification of the pre-text.153 A single text may have a different status according to the context.154 These processes are of fundamental 152 This kind of paraphrase is what G. Genette (1997: 309) refers to as the ‘indirect synopsis’ in medieval chapter lists. See below. 153 Raible

o
idem

o
DG
BMTP
Hellholm 2010: §2.3.(regarding the composition of the Shepherd of Hermas) and M. Leutzsch 1998: 131 (on the Oneirocriticon of Artemidorus) 154 This is the case e.g. with the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις. They appear as meta-texts in biblical manuscripts but when they are found in a separate collection, the Pseudo-Athanasian Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae, they may

Aim and Structure of the Study

41

importance both for ancient and modern literature. Here, only a few examples from the NT can be mentioned: (a) The Gospel of Matthew represents an amplified version of Mark, the most important additions being the Q material. (b) 2 Thess is probably both a reduced and amplified version of 1 Thess. Here the eschatological teaching in 2 Thess o
IBT
CFFO
BEEFE
D
ćF
TPDBMMFE
%UFYU
PG
UIF
"DUT
JT
BO
BNQMJĕFE
WFSTJPO
PG
that book. (d) In late antiquity, the biblical texts were often paraphrased to meet the standards of Greek learning. One of the most famous examples is the paraphrase of the Gospel of John in Greek hexameters by Nonnus of Panopolis (5th cent.). Thus, the process of paraphrasing is found both in the creation of new texts (parallel texts) and in the transformation of the form of an already existing text. There are obviously many different motivations for the making of revisions or paraphrases. In his recent commentary on Acts, Richard Pervo has pointed out that the D-text of Acts attempts to keep the text of Acts ‘up to date’. He describes this process as ‘contemporization’, and finds that not only the D-text of Acts, but also the Deutero-Pauline letters and the editorial changes in the Pauline corpus are examples of this process.155 This revision evidently contains a creative element. New motifs are added that were not present in the pre-text.156 In this context, we should not neglect the influence of various auxiliary materials that can be added to the text. Texts such as prologues, summaries and titles may exert a strong influence on the reader. This was pointed out by Dahl in his study of the socalled Marcionite prologues to the Pauline letters. According to Dahl, these prologues exemplified how great the influence of an editor can be, especially if the editor also is a composer of prologues. In these prologues, Paul is repeatedly depicted as fighting against the ‘false apostles’, who represent a relapse into Judaism. The description of the conflict between Paul and the ‘false apostles’ became a paradigm for numerous later commentators, regardless of whether they had direct knowledge of these prologues or not. Mediated through the works of Ambrosiaster and Pelagius, their influence extended through the centuries, perhaps even to Ferdinand Christian Baur and his followers.157 This example shows that the study of an edition is not necessarily a narrow textual study, but may also be rewarding for the study of theology and intellectual history in general. Thus, each edition of Paul with auxiliary materials presents a ‘Paulusbild’, an image of Paul, that may once have been intended as a ‘contemporization’. This updated image, however, with the passage of time may itself become frozen and be treated as a fixed part of the tradition.158

be considered parallel texts to the biblical material, see Hellholm/Blomkvist

o
"QQ
**
304o305) and below III.2.1. fin. 155 See R. I. Pervo 2009: 4. As examples of this process, Pervo here mentions the baptismal confession in Acts 8:37, the secondary form of the Apostolic Decree (Acts 15:29) and a general Anti-Judaic tendency in the additions to the text. 156 On the addition of new elements in commentaries, cf. G. Schoeler

o
XIP
QPJOUT
UP
UIF
discovery of the system of blood circulation in an Arabic commentary on a work of Avicenna. 157 See Dahl (1978/2000: 204). 158 The present study uses the German word ‘Paulusbild’, for which there seems to be no good English equivalent. The standard work on this theme is A. Lindemann

TFF
FTQFDJBMMZ
QQ
o
BOE
idem 1999: o

42

Introductory Issues

3.3.4. Parallel Materials In his study of the Euthalian apparatus, Willard suggests that an analysis of the apparatus in the light of patristic exegesis may contribute to the solution of the question of authorship. According to Willard, the presence of a notable or unusual observation both in the Euthalian apparatus and in some patristic commentary may locate Euthalius in a theological milieu with greater precision.159 This attractive method should not be rejected. It presupposes, however, that the notable or unusual elements in the apparatus have been identified so that the student of the patristic authors will know what to look for. This identification of notable features is one of the tasks of the present commentary. The second step, that of placing Euthalius in a theological milieu, has to be left to other scholars. The main reason for this restriction is the wealth of material that should be examined.160 This examination can only be done by reading the patristic sources in the original, since an electronic search of the texts in this study would be unsatisfactory and unreliable. One may through this means possibly find authors who use some of the key terms of Euthalius, but the important questions relating to the ideas and their expression cannot be studied with such tools. For this reason, the present study has refrained from using any electronic tools and relies on the reading of texts. The parallel material used in this study is therefore chosen not because they supposedly are close to the apparatus in time and space, but rather because they have some generic affinities with it. The parallel material quoted throughout the present study is (a) The so-called Marcionite prologues to the Pauline letters, possibly dating to the 2nd cent.; (b) The Canones of Priscillian (4th cent.);161 (c) the 5th cent. commentary on the Pauline letters by Theodoret including ὑποθέσεις of each letter;162 (d) The 11th cent. commentary on the letters and Acts by Theophylact including ὑποθέσεις of all the books.163 In addition to these, the History of the Church and Chronikon of Eusebius are referred to, since these are the only patristic works that are explicitly mentioned in the text of the apparatus.

159 See Willard 1970: 180/2009: 134. 160 Dahl suggested to me that a reading of the Euthalian apparatus in the light of the works of Origen could be rewarding, as his name has been associated with the apparatus through Evagrius. 161 On Priscillian and Priscillianism, see J. Fontaine 1997; H. C. Brennecke 1999 and W. Löhr 2003. 162 On Theodoret, see A. Viciano 2000; J.-N. Guinot 2002 and S.-P. Bergjan 2005. 163 On Theophylact, see G. Podskalsky 2000; Chr. Hannick 2002 and Brennecke 2005. The ὑποθέσεις of Acts and the Catholic letter in Theophylact are identical with the Euthalian material.

Part Two Text and Translation

II. The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι Hermann von Soden’s Greek Text with My Translation Κεφάλαια

Chapters

Ἔκθεσις κεφαλαίων καθολικῶν καθ᾽ ἑκάστην ἐπιστολὴν τοῦ ἀποστόλου Παύλου ἐχόντων τινῶν καὶ μερικὰς ὑποδιαιρέσεις τὰς διὰ τοῦ κινναβάρεως.

Survey of the general chapters of every letter of the Apostle Paul, some of them also having subdivisions written in red ink.

Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Ῥωμαίους ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶
$o$

Chapters of the Letter to the Romans

εὐαγγελικὴ διδασκαλία περί τε τῶν ἔξω χάριτος Χριστοῦ καὶ τῶν ἐν χάριτι, καὶ περὶ ἐλπίδος, καὶ πολιτείας πνευματικῆς.

Teaching according to the gospel about both those with and those without the grace of Christ, about hope and spiritual citizenship.

α (1:18) πρῶτον μὲν οὖν μετὰ τὸ προοίμιον, περὶ κρίσεως τῆς κατὰ ἐθνῶν τῶν οὐ φυλασσόντων τὰ φυσικά.

I (1:18) First, after the prooemium, about the judgment against Gentiles who do not follow the natural principles.

β (2:12) περὶ κρίσεως τῆς κατὰ Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ μὴ φυλάσσοντος τὰ νόμιμα.

II (2:12) About the judgment against Israel that does not follow the precepts of the Law.

γ (3:1) περὶ ὑπεροχῆς Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ τυγχάνοντος τῆς ἐπαγγελίας.

III (3:1) About the superiority of Israel that received the promise.

δ (3:9) περὶ χάριτος, δι᾽ ἧς μόνον ἄνθρωποι δικαιοῦνται, οὐ κατὰ γένος διακεκριμένως, ἀλλὰ κατὰ θεοῦ δόσιν ἰσοτίμως, κατὰ τὸν Ἀβραὰμ τύπον.

IV (3:9) About grace, the only means by which men are justified, as they are not evaluated according to race, but equally, according to the gift of God, following the example of Abraham.

ε (5:1) περὶ τῆς ἀποκειμένης ἐλπίδος.

V (5:1) About what we hope for, waiting in store.

46

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

Ĵ (5:12) περὶ εἰσαγωγῆς τοῦ πρὸς σωτηρίαν ἡμῶν ἀνθρώπου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἀντὶ τοῦ πεσόντος ἐξ ἀρχῆς γηγενοῦς Ἀδάμ.

VI (5:12) About the access through Jesus Christ, a human being for our salvation, in the place of the earth-born Adam, he who fell from the beginning.

ζ (6:1) περὶ τῆς ὀφειλομένης ἐπὶ τῇ πίστει πράξεως ἀγαθῆς.

VII (6:1) About the good behavior we owe because of faith.

η (7:1) ἐπανάληψις περὶ τῆς ἐν χάριτι ζωῆς.

VIII (7:1) Repetition about life in grace.

θ (7:7) περὶ τῆς ὑπὸ νόμου κατακρίσεως διὰ τὴν ἁμαρτίαν.

IX (7:7) About condemnation under the Law because of sin.

ι (7:18) περὶ τῶν ἐν ἀνθρωπίνῃ φύσει παθῶν, ἀδύνατον ποιούντων τὴν πρὸς νόμον συμφωνίαν.

X (7:18) About the desires in the human nature, making life according to the Law impossible.

ια (8:3) περὶ τῆς ἀποδύσεως τῶν φυσικῶν παθημάτων, διὰ τῆς πρὸς τὸ πνεῦμα συναφείας.

XI (8:3) About putting off natural desires through conjunction with the Spirit.

ιβ (8:18) ἐπανάληψις περὶ τῆς ἀποκειμένης τοῖς ἁγίοις δόξης.

XII (8:18) Repetition about the glory that lies in store for the saints.

ιγ (8:35) περὶ τῆς ὀφειλομένης ἀγάπης Χριστῷ.

XIII (8:35) About the love we owe to Christ.

ιδ (9:1) περὶ ἐκπτώσεως Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ ἀποβληθέντος, καὶ κλήσεως τοῦ ἀληθοῦς, τοῦ ἐκλεχθέντος μετὰ ἐθνῶν.

XIV (9:1) About the fall of the rejected Israel and the calling of the true one that was elected along with the Gentiles.

ιε (9:30) ὅτι κατὰ ἀπιστίαν ἡ ἔκπτωσις διὰ τῆς εἰς ἄγνοιαν ἐγκαταλείψεως, καὶ τοῦ μὴ ἁρμόζοντος αὐτοῖς κηρύγματος.

XV (9:30) That the fall happened due to unfaithfulness, because their understanding was turned to ignorance and because the message did not appear to be suitable for them.

ιĴ (11:1) περὶ τοῦ σκοποῦ, καθ᾽ ὃν ἐξεβλήθησαν, ὥστε δεύτερον ἐπανελθεῖν ζήλῳ τῶν προτιμηθέντων ἐθνῶν, συνταχθέντων τῷ πιστῷ Ἰσραήλ.

XVI (11:1) About the plan, according to which they were rejected, so that they may return on a second occasion, in zeal of the Gentiles who had the privilege of being joined to the faithful Israel.

ιζ (12:1) παραίνεσις περὶ ἀρετῆς τῆς πρὸς τὸν θεὸν καὶ ἀνθρώπους, ἐν ᾧ

XVII (12:1) Exhortation about virtue before God and men. In this:




͋ϣϲрϩϟϧϟ
o
$IBQUFST

47

(12:3) περὶ τῆς πρὸς ἀλλήλους ὁμονοίας, (12:10) περὶ τῆς πρὸς θεὸν λατρείας, (12:14) περὶ τῆς πρὸς ἀντικειμένους ἀνεξικακίας, (13:1) περὶ τῆς πρὸς ἄρχοντας ὑποταγῆς, (13:11) περὶ σωφροσύνης καὶ πραότητος, (14:1) περὶ τῆς ἐν βρώμασι καὶ ἡμέραις ἀμάχου διανοίας.

(12:3) About concord with one another. (12:10) About service to God. (12:14) About forbearance toward adversaries. (13:1) About subordination under rulers. (13:11) About prudence and gentleness. (14:1) About peaceful attitude regarding food and days.

ιη (15:1) περὶ μιμήσεως τῆς Χριστοῦ ἀνεξικακίας.

XVIII (15:1) About imitation of the forbearance of Christ.

ιθ (15:15) περὶ τῆς λειτουργίας αὐτοῦ, τῆς ἐν ἀνατολῇ καὶ δύσει.

XIX (15:15) About his service in the East and in the West.

Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Κορινθίους ɀϮьϰϥ϶
ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶
$o$

Chapters of the First Letter to the Corinthians

περὶ πλειόνων καὶ διαφόρων ἡ ἐπιστολὴ διόρθωσιν ἔχει τῶν Κορινθίοις ἡμαρτημένων.

This letter contains correction of the many and different errors of the Corinthians.

α (1:10) μετὰ τὸ προοίμιον, περὶ τοῦ μὴ διχονοεῖν πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἐκ φιλοδοξίας τῆς ἐπὶ σοφίᾳ ἀνθρωπίνῃ, ἐν ᾧ (1:26?, 2:1?) περὶ θείας σοφίας, (3:5?) περὶ λειτουργιῶν, (4:1) περὶ τοῦ μὴ κρίνειν διδασκάλους, (4:6) περὶ τοῦ μὴ ἐπαίρεσθαι. β (4:21) κατὰ πορνῶν, καὶ πορνείας καὶ τῶν τούτοις κοινωνούντων.

γ (6:1) περὶ τοῦ μὴ δεῖσθαι δικῶν, καὶ ταῦτα ἐπὶ ἀπίστων, ἐν ᾧ (6:12) περὶ τοῦ μὴ πορνεύειν. δ (7:1) περὶ γάμου καὶ χηρείας καὶ ἀγαμίας, ἐν ᾧ (7:10) περὶ τοῦ μὴ χωρίζεσθαι ἄνδρας τῶν γυναικῶν, μηδὲ εἰ ἄπιστοι εἶεν οἱ ἕτεροι,

I (1:10) After the prooemium, about not disagreeing with one another out of desire for glory, caused by human wisdom. In this: (1:26?, 2:1?) About divine wisdom. (3:5?) About ministries. (4:1) About not judging teachers. (4:6) About not exalting oneself. II (4:21) Against fornicators and fornication, and those who consort with such people. III (6:1) About not demanding trials, and not doing this in view of unbelievers. In this: (6:12) About not committing adultery. IV (7:1) About marriage, widowhood and celibacy. In this: (7:10) That men should not be divorced from their wives, even if the other part is an unbeliever.

48

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

(7:25) περὶ ἀγνείας καὶ διγαμίας.

(7:25) About chastity and remarriage.

ε (8:1) περὶ διαφορᾶς ἐδεσμάτων, καὶ ἀποχῆς δαιμονικοῦ σεβάσματος, ἐν ᾧ (9:1) περὶ συμπεριφορᾶς, (9:7) περὶ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ πολυπλόκου συμπεριφορᾶς, (10:14) περὶ τοῦ μὴ κοινωνεῖν δαίμοσι, (10:18?, 23?) περὶ τοῦ μὴ ἀδιαφορεῖν ἐν ὠνίοις, καὶ κλήσεσι.

V (8:1) About different foods and abstaining from worship of demons. In this: (9:1) About adaptability. (9:7) About his cunning adaptability. (10:14) About not having fellowship with demons. (10:18?, 23?) About not showing indifference to purchased foods and to invitations.

Ĵ (11:1) περὶ σχήματος ἀνδρῶν καὶ γυναικῶν, ἐν εὐχαῖς καὶ προφητείαις.

VI (11:1) About the appearance of men and women in prayer and prophecy.

ζ (11:17) περὶ κοινωνίας θεοπρεποῦς, οὐ πλησμονικῆς.

VII (11:17) About proper communion before God, which does not aim at satisfaction.

η (12:1) περὶ διαφορᾶς χαρισμάτων, καὶ οἰκονομίας αὐτῶν, ἐν ᾧ (12:31b) περὶ ἀγάπης, ὡς μεγίστου χαρίσματος, (14:1) περὶ προφητείας, ὡς μείζονος γλώσσης.

VIII (12:1) About the different gifts and the coordination of them. In this: (12:31b) About love as the greatest gift.

θ (15:1) περὶ ἀναστάσεως σωμάτων καθολικῆς, ἐν ᾧ (15:20) περὶ τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ διορθώσεως, καὶ ἀποκαταστάσεως, (15:35) ὁμοίωσις τῶν ἀνισταμένων πρὸς τὰ ἀναφυόμενα σπέρματα, (15:50) περὶ τῆς εἰς δόξαν καὶ δύναμιν ἀλλαγῆς.

IX (15:1) About the universal resurrection of the bodies. In this: (15:20) About the correction and restitution in Christ. (15:35) Likening of the rising bodies to seeds growing anew. (15:50) About the transformation in power and glory.

Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Koρινθίους ϢϣϱϰтϮϟ϶
ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶
#o#

Chapters of the Second Letter to the Corinthians

α (1:3) εὐχαριστία περὶ θεοῦ βοηθείας, ᾗ πεποιθέναι φησίν.

I (1:3) Thanksgiving for the aid of God, in which he says he has confided.

β (1:15) περὶ ἀγάπης τῆς πρὸς αὐτοὺς, καὶ φειδοῦς εἰς τὸ μὴ λυπεῖν, εἰ καὶ λυπῶν ὠφελεῖ, ὡς ἐπὶ τοῦ διὰ πορνείαν ἐπιτιμηθέντος, ᾧ καὶ συγχωρεῖ.

II (1:15) About his love for them and his refraining from giving them grief, even if he in this way could help them, as [he did]

(14:1) About prophecy as something greater than speaking in tongues.




͋ϣϲрϩϟϧϟ
o
$IBQUFST

49

concerning the man rebuked for adultery, whom he also pardoned. γ (2:12) περὶ τῆς δι᾽ αὐτοῦ θείας ὠφελείας τοῖς ἐπιτηδείοις, δι᾽ ἧς καὶ συνίστασθαί φησιν.

III (2:12) About the divine help to friendly persons through him, for which he says he is also commended.

δ (3:7) περὶ τῆς κατὰ πνεῦμα λειτουργίας, καὶ δόξης θειοτέρας τῆς κατὰ τὸν νόμον.

IV (3:7) About ministry according to the Spirit, and about a glory more divine than that of the Law.

ε (4:1) περὶ θείας δόξης, καὶ ἀκολούθου βίου, ὅτι τοῖς ἁγίοις γινώσκεται.

V (4:1) About divine glory and the way of life that follows it, because it is known to the holy ones.

Ĵ (4:7) περὶ τῆς κατὰ σῶμα ἀσθενείας, VI (4:7) About the weakness of the body, καὶ τῆς τοῦ σώματος ἀποθέσεως καὶ and about taking off the body and putting ἐπαναλήψεως. it on again. ζ (5:12) περὶ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ φιλοθεότητος, καὶ φιλαδελφίας τῆς κατὰ Χριστόν.

VII (5:12) About his love of God and his love of the brethren in Christ.

η (7:2) ἀποδοχὴ τῆς Κορινθίων ὑπακοῆς, VIII (7:2) Praise of the obedience of the καὶ ἀγάπης εὐφραινούσης αὐτόν. Corinthians and of their love, which makes him happy. θ (8:1) προτροπὴ εἰς ἐπίδοσιν χρημάτων τοῖς ἁγίοις, καὶ τιμὴν τῶν διὰ τοῦτο ἐρχομένων, ἐν ᾧ (8:16) περὶ τῆς Τίτου ἀποστολῆς, καὶ τῶν ἄλλων πρὸς αὐτούς.

IX (8:1) Encouragement to give money to the saints and to respect those coming for this purpose. In this: (8:16) About the mission of Titus and others to them.

ι (10:1) διήγησις τῶν ἰδίων πόνων καὶ προθέσεως, καὶ τῆς ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ χάριτος πρὸς τὸ μὴ τοῖς ἐπιπλάστοις προστίθεσθαι Κορινθίους, ἐν ᾧ (11:1) ἀντεξέτασις ἑαυτοῦ πρὸς ἐκείνους, (11:7) ἔλεγχος ἐκείνων, (11:21) περὶ ἑαυτοῦ τὸ ἐπίπονον, τὸ παρὰ θεῷ τίμιον, τὸ ὠφελίμως αὐτότροφον,

X (10:1) Narration of his own toils, his aim, and the grace in him, in order that the Corinthians should not join the impostors. In this: (11:1) A comparison of him with those. (11:7) A refutation of those people. (11:21) Concerning his labors, his honor before God and his useful self-sustainment. (12:14) Preparation for his future arrival.

(12:14) παρασκευὴ πρὸς τὴν μέλλουσαν αὐτοῦ παρουσίαν.

50

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Γαλάτας ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶
%o#

Chapters of the Letter to the Galatians

α (1:11) μετὰ τὸ προοίμιον, διήγησις τῆς ἑαυτοῦ μεταστάσεως ἀπὸ ἰουδαϊσμοῦ κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν.

I (1:11) After the prooemium, narration of his own renunciation of Judaism according to a revelation.

β (2:1) περὶ τῆς τῶν ἀποστόλων ἐπιμαρτυρήσεως εἰς τὴν ἐν πίστει ζωήν.

II (2:1) About the testimony of the apostles to his life in faith.

γ (2:11) περὶ τῆς πρὸς Κηφᾶν ἀντιῤῥήσεως ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐν πίστει, καὶ οὐκ ἐν νόμῳ σωτηρίας.

III (2:11) About his discussion with Cephas on salvation, which is not by the Law, but by faith.

δ (3:1) ὅτι διὰ πίστεως ἁγιασμὸς καὶ οὐ διὰ νόμου.

IV (3:1) That sanctification is not through the Law, but through faith.

ε (3:7) ὅτι καὶ Ἀβραὰμ ἐκ πίστεως ἐδικαιώθη, εἰς τύπον ἡμῶν.

V (3:7) That also Abraham was justified by faith, to be an example for us.

Ĵ (3:10) ὅτι ὁ νόμος οὐ δικαιοῖ, ἀλλ᾽ VI (3:10) That the Law does not justify, but ἐλέγχει, καὶ κατάραν ἐπιτίθησιν, ἣν λύει ὁ accuses, and that it brings a curse, which Χριστός. Christ brings to an end. ζ (3:15) ὅτι οὐκ ἐκ νόμου, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξ ἐπαγγελίας τὰ ἀγαθά· ὁ δὲ νόμος παρασκευαστὴς δι᾽ ἐλέγχου.

VII (3:15) That benefits are not from the Law, but from the promise. The Law is a preparer through its accusations.

η (4:1) ὅτι ὑπὸ κτίσιν ἦσαν οἱ ἐν νόμῳ.

VIII (4:1) That the people of the Law were subjected to creation.

θ (4:21) ὅτι ἐν τῇ ἐλευθέρᾳ γυναικὶ τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ, καὶ τῷ γνησίῳ παιδὶ ὑποτυπωθέντας, οὐ χρὴ δουλοῦσθαι νόμῳ.

IX (4:21) That there is no need to be enslaved under the Law if we follow the example of the free wife of Abraham and their legitimate son.

ι (5:2) ὅτι ἡ κλῆσις ἡμῶν οὐχ ὑπόκειται περιτομῇ καὶ νόμῳ διὰ τὸ τοῦ Χριστοῦ πάθος.

X (5:2) That our calling is not subjected to circumcision and the Law because of the suffering of Christ.

ια (5:13) ὑπογραφὴ τῆς κατὰ πνεῦμα ἐλευθερίας.

XI (5:13) Description of freedom according to the Spirit.




51

͋ϣϲрϩϟϧϟ
o
$IBQUFST

ιβ (6:11) ἀποτροπὴ ἀπὸ τῶν ἑλκόντων ἐπὶ τὴν περιτομὴν, καὶ προτροπὴ πρὸς νέαν ζωὴν τὴν ὑπὸ πνεύματι.

XII (6:11) Warning against those who drag men to circumcision, and encouragement to a new life under the Spirit.

Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Ἐφεσίους ἐπιστολῆς (764AC)

Chapters of the Letter to the Ephesians

α (1:3) περὶ τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ ἐκλογῆς ἡμῶν, καὶ εἰσαγωγῆς, καὶ τελειώσεως.

I (1:3) About our election, our initiation and our perfection in Christ.

β (1:15) εὐχὴ περὶ γνώσεως τῶν ἐν Χριστῷ εἰσαχθέντων ἀγαθῶν εἰς ἡμᾶς.

II (1:15) Prayer for understanding of the benefits brought to us in Christ.

γ (2:1) περὶ τῆς ἐθνῶν καὶ Ἰουδαίων III (2:1) About Gentiles and Jews becomοἰκειώσεως πρὸς θεὸν διὰ Χριστοῦ ἐπ᾽ ing God’s own through Christ, for the sake ἐλπίδι κατὰ χάριν. of hope, according to grace. δ (3:1) περὶ τῆς δοθείσης αὐτῷ θείας σοφίας εἰς φωτισμὸν ἐθνῶν, καὶ ἔλεγχον δαιμονίων.

IV (3:1) About divine wisdom, given to him, so that he may illuminate the Gentiles and rebuke the demons.

ε (3:14) εὐχὴ ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐκκλησίας εἰς δύναμιν καὶ ἀγάπην θεοῦ.

V (3:14) Prayer on behalf of the Church for the power and love of God.

Ĵ (4:1) παραίνεσις περὶ ἀγάπης ἐνωτικῆς, εἰ καὶ τὰ χαρίσματα διῄρηται πρὸς ὠφέλειαν κοινήν.

VI (4:1) Exhortation about unifying love, even if the gifts of grace are distributed to common benefit.

ζ (4:17) περὶ σωφροσύνης καὶ δικαιοσύνης ποιούσης ἡμᾶς θεοειδεῖς.

VII (4:17) About prudence and righteousness, which make us God-like.

η (5:3) περὶ τοῦ ζῇν ἐπαξίως τοῦ ἁγιασμοῦ, VIII (5:3) About living in a manner worἔργοις τὴν κακίαν ἐλέγχοντας, μὴ λόγοις· thy of the sanctification, rebuking evil with πνεύματι πληρουμένους διὰ ψαλμῶν, μὴ deeds, not with words, through hymns beοἴνῳ. ing filled with the Spirit, not with wine. θ (5:22) διάταξις οἰκειακῶν καθηκόντων ἀρχομένοις καὶ ἄρχουσι κατὰ Χριστόν.

IX (5:22) Regulation of the domestic duties of those who are ruled and of those who rule, according to Christ.

ι (6:10) ἐν σχήματι ὁπλίσεως περὶ τῆς κατὰ Χριστὸν δυνάμεως.

X (6:10) About the power of Christ, in the image of preparing for battle.

52

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Φιλιππησίους ἐπιστολῆς (765BC)

Chapters of the Letter to the Philippians

α (1:3) εὐχαριστία ὑπὲρ τῆς Φιλιππησίων ἀρετῆς, καὶ εὐχὴ τελειώσεως.

I (1:3) Thanksgiving for the virtue of the Philippians, and prayer for their perfection.

β (1:12) διήγησις τῆς ἑαυτοῦ διαγωγῆς ἀγωνιστικῆς, καὶ τῆς προθυμίας.

II (1:12) Narration of his life in struggle and of his zeal.

γ (1:27) παραίνεσις τῆς κατὰ θεὸν ὁμονοίας, καὶ τῆς ἐνθέου ζωῆς.

III (1:27) Exhortation to concord according to God and to a life in God.

δ (2:19) περὶ Τιμοθέου καὶ Επαφροδίτου, οὓς ἀπέστειλε πρὸς αὐτούς.

IV (2:19) About Timothy and Epaphroditus, whom he has sent to them.

ε (3:1) περὶ πνευματικοῦ βίου τοῦ μὴ ἐν σαρκὶ, ὅς ἐστι μίμησις θανάτου τοῦ Χριστοῦ.

V (3:1) About spiritual life, not in the flesh, as an imitation of the death of Christ.

Ĵ (4:1) παραινέσεις ἴδιαί τινων, καὶ κοιναὶ πάντων.

VI (4:1) Exhortations, specific ones for some and common ones for all.

ζ (4:10) ἀποδοχὴ τῆς ἀποσταλείσης αὐτῷ διακονίας.

VII (4:10) Praise of the contribution sent to him.

Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Κολασσαεῖς ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶
#o"

Chapters of the Letter to the Colossians

α (1:3) εὐχαριστία ὑπὲρ Κολασσαέων, οἰκειωθέντων τῷ θεῷ ἐπ᾽ ἐλπίδι.

I (1:3) Thanksgiving for the Colossians, who have been made God’s own in hope.

β (1:9) εὐχὴ περὶ αὐτῶν εἰς σοφίαν πρακτικὴν, εἰς δύναμιν ὑπομονῆς, σὺν εὐχαριστίᾳ τῆς οἰκειώσεως, τῆς ἐν καθάρσει.

II (1:9) Prayer on their behalf for prudent behavior, for strength to endure, with thanksgiving for being made God’s own in purification.

γ (1:14) περὶ τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ κτίσεως, καὶ ἀνακτίσεως τῆς κατὰ συνάφειαν θεοῦ.

III (1:14) About creation in Christ and recreation by union with God.

δ (1:21) περὶ ἐθνῶν προσαγωγῆς τῆς ἐν σώματι Χριστοῦ, καὶ πάθει διὰ πίστεως.

IV (1:21) About the privilege of entrance given to the Gentiles by the body of Christ and his suffering, through faith.




͋ϣϲрϩϟϧϟ
o
$IBQUFST

53

ε (1:24) περὶ τῆς διὰ τῶν πόνων αὐτοῦ διδαχῆς ἀνακτικῆς εἰς παράστασιν θεοῦ.

V (1:24) About the teaching that persists through his labors, to present them before God.

Ĵ (2:1) περὶ τοῦ μὴ ὑπάγεσθαι ἀνθρωπίνῃ φιλοσοφίᾳ ἀπατηλῇ τοὺς ἐν Χριστῷ τὴν σοφίαν ἔχοντας.

VI (2:1) About people with wisdom in God, that they should not be led by deceitful human philosophy.

ζ (2:11) ὅτι ἡ πρὸς θεὸν συνάφεια καὶ τὰ τοῦ νόμου περιέχει πνευματικῶς εἰς τὸ συζῇν Χριστῷ.

VII (2:11) That contact with God involves spiritually what belongs to the Law, aiming at a life in Christ.

η (2:16) ὅτι οἱ τοῦ σαρκικοῦ νομοῦ τύποι, τοῖς σαρκικοῖς χρήσιμοι, καὶ οὐ πνευματικοῖς, τοῖς ἐν δυνάμει Χριστοῦ ζῶσιν.

VIII (2:16) That the examples of the carnal Law are useful for those who have the nature of the flesh, but not for the pneumatics, who live by the power of Christ.

θ (3:5?) παραίνεσις καθάρσεως, ἁγιασμοῦ, φιλανθρωπίας, φιλοθεότητος φιλομαθίας, ψαλμῳδίας εὐφήμου, εἰς θεὸν διαγωγῆς, εὐχαριστίας.

IX (3:5?) Exhortation to cleansing, sanctification, love of men, love of God, love of learning, singing of psalms, life in praise of God and thanksgiving.

ι (3:16) τὰ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους ὁμονοητικῶς, ἐν ᾧ τὰ πρὸς τοὺς ἀλλοτρίους ἐμφρόνως οἰκονομικῶς.

X (3:16) Relations to members of the family, in harmony. In this: Relations to outsiders, in a prudent and well-ordered manner.

Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Θεσσαλονικεῖς ɀϮьϰϥ϶
ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶
%o#

Chapters of the First Letter to the Thessalonians

α (1:3) ἔπαινος Θεσσαλονικέων ἐπὶ τοῖς ἀξίοις τῶν ἀποστόλων ἀγῶσιν.

I (1:3) Praise of the Thessalonians for their struggles worthy of the apostles.

β (2:17) πόθος αὐτῶν καὶ χαρὰ ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς, καὶ μέριμνα, ὡς ἂν τελειωθῶσιν.

II (2:17) His longing and joy for them, and his concern for their perfection.

γ (3:11) εὐχὴ πρὸς θεὸν Χριστὸν περὶ ἀφίξεως τῆς αὑτοῦ, καὶ τῆς αὐξήσεως, καὶ βεβαιώσεως Θεσσαλονικέων, ἕως τῆς παρουσίας Χριστοῦ.

III (3:11) Prayer to God and Christ for his own arrival and for progress and strengthening of the Thessalonians until the coming of Christ.

δ (4:1) παραίνεσις σωφροσύνης καὶ δικαιοσύνης, ὡς ἐπὶ κρίσει, φιλαδελφίας, ἐργασίας ἰδιοπράγμονος.

IV (4:1) Exhortation to temperance, justice as if before the judgment, brotherly love and work with one’s own business.

54

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

ε (4:13) διδασκαλία περὶ τῆς τοῦ θανάτου καταλύσεως ἐπὶ ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν ἐν ἐπιφανείᾳ Χριστοῦ.

V (4:13) Teaching about the abolition of death for the living and the dead when Christ appears.

Ĵ (5:1) περὶ τοῦ αἰφνιδίως ἥξειν Χριστὸν, VI (5:1) About the sudden coming of ὥστε δεῖν εὐτρεπίζεσθαι σπουδῇ, πίστει, Christ, so that we should prepare ourselves ἐλπίδι, ἀγάπῃ, τιμῇ, εἰρήνῃ, μακροθυμίᾳ, with zeal, faith, hope, love, honor, peace, φιλομαθίᾳ. patience and love of learning. ζ (5:23) εὐχὴ περὶ ἁγιασμοῦ πνεύματος, καὶ ψυχῆς καὶ σώματος.

VII (5:23) Prayer for sanctification of spirit, soul and body.

Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Θεσσαλονικεῖς δευτέρας ἐπιστολῆς (773AB)

Chapters of the Second Letter to the Thessalonians

α (1:3) εὐχαριστία ὑπὲρ τῆς τῶν Θεσσαλονικέων πίστεως, καὶ ἀγάπης καὶ ὑπομονῆς, ἐπὶ τιμῇ αὐτῶν καὶ κολάσει τῶν θλιβόντων· καὶ εὐχὴ ὑπὲρ τελειώσεως αὐτῶν ἐν δόξῃ ἐπὶ δόξῃ Χριστοῦ.

I (1:3) Thanksgiving for the faith of the Thessalonians, their love and their steadfastness, for the sake of their honor and the punishment of their persecutors. And prayer for their glorious perfection, to the glory of Christ.

β (2:1) περὶ τέλους, ὅτι μετὰ ἀντίχριστον πεμπόμενον ἐπὶ ἐλέγχῳ Ἰουδαίων τῶν ἀπιστησάντων Χριστῷ.

II (2:1) About the end, that it is after Antichrist, who is sent to convict the Jews who did not believe in Christ.

γ (2:13) εὐχαριστία τῆς κλήσεως, ἐν ᾧ προτροπὴ ἐπιμονῆς εὐχὴ πρὸς θεὸν καὶ Χριστὸν περὶ στεριγμοῦ αὐτῶν.

III (2:13) Thanksgiving for the call. In this: Encouragement to endure. Prayer to God and Christ for their sustenance.

δ (3:1) παράκλησις εὐχῆς ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἔργου, ἐν ᾧ εὐχὴ ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν εἰς ἀγάπην θεοῦ.

IV (3:1) Exhortation to pray for him and his work. In this: Prayer for them to obtain the love of God.

ε (3:6) προτροπὴ ἐργασίας, καὶ παραιτήσεως τῶν ἀργῶν καὶ περιέργων.

V (3:6) Encouragement to work and to avoid idle and meddlesome people.

Ĵ (3:16) εὐχὴ περὶ εἰρήνης τῆς παρὰ θεοῦ.

VI (3:16) Prayer for peace from God.




55

͋ϣϲрϩϟϧϟ
o
$IBQUFST

Kεφαλαια τῆς πρὸς Τιμόθεον ɀϮьϰϥ϶
ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶
$o$

Chapters of the First Letter to Timothy

α (1:3) περὶ τῆς εἰς ἀγάπην θεοῦ ὁδηγίας, τὴν ἀπροσδεῆ νομικῆς ἀνάγκης.

I (1:3) About guidance to love God, which does not need the constraint of the law.

β (1:12) περὶ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ ἐκλογῆς εἰς εὐαγγελιστὴν ἐκ διώκτου κατὰ χάριν θεοῦ.

II (1:12) About the election of him as an evangelist from being a persecutor, according to the grace of God.

γ (1:18) παραγγελία περὶ πιστῆς καὶ εὐσυνειδήτου διακονίας, ἧς ἄνευ κίνδυνος.

III (1:18) Instruction about faithful service, with good conscience, without which there is danger.

δ (2:1) περὶ εὐχῆς, ὅτι ὑπὲρ πάντων πανταχοῦ, ἀκάκως, ἀταράχως, σεμνῶς.

IV (2:1) About prayer, that it should be for everybody, everywhere, without evil, quiet and solemn.

ε (2:11) περὶ διδασκάλων, ὅτι ἄνδρας χρὴ, V (2:11) About teachers, that they must καὶ οὐ γυναῖκας εἶναι διὰ τὴν φύσιν, καὶ be men and not women, because of naτὸ πάθος, τὸ ἐξ ἀπάτης, ὃ λύει γέννησις ἡ ture and the suffering after the deception, Χριστοῦ, καὶ πίστις αὐτῶν, καὶ βίος. removed by the birth of Christ, their faith and their manner of living. Ĵ (3:1) περὶ ἀρετῆς ἐπισκόπων, ἐν ᾧ (3:8) περὶ διακόνων ἀνδρῶν τε καὶ γυναικῶν.

VI (3:1) About the virtue of bishops. In this: (3:8) About deacons, men as well as women.

ζ (3:16) περὶ θείας σαρκώσεως, ἐν ᾧ (4:1) περὶ τῶν ἐσομένων αἱρέσεων δαιμονικῶν.

VII (3:16) About the divine incarnation. In this: (4:1) About the coming demonic heresies.

η (4:8) περὶ ἀγῶνος εὐσεβείας ἐπ᾽ ἐλπίδι.

VIII (4:8) About the struggle for piety, in hope.

θ (4:11) περὶ ἐπιμελείας αὐτοῦ καὶ τῆς ἐκκλησίας.

IX (4:11) About giving heed to himself and to the Church.

ι (5:1) περὶ τοῦ ἁρμοζόντως ἑκάστῳ προσφέρεσθαι.

X (5:1) About dealing with everyone in a proper manner.

56

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

ια (5:4) περὶ χηρῶν ἡλικίας καὶ τρόπου καὶ διοικήσεως.

XI (5:4) About the age of widows, their manner and how to look after them.

ιβ (5:17) περὶ πρεσβυτέρων τιμῆς.

XII (5:17) About the honor of the elders.

ιγ (5:22) περὶ χειροτονίας ἀσφαλοῦς.

XIII (5:22) About safe voting.

ιδ (5:24) ὅτι οὐδὲν ἔργον λανθάνει.

XIV (5:24) That no deed remains hidden.

ιε (6:1) περὶ δούλων ὑπακοῆς.

XV (6:1) About the obedience of slaves.

ιĴ (6:3) κατὰ ψευδοδιδασκάλων.

φιλοκερδῶν

καὶ

XVI (6:3) Against the greedy and the false teachers.

ιζ (6:13) παραγγελία φοβερὰ περὶ καθαρᾶς ὑπακοῆς ἄχρι τέλους.

XVII (6:13) Frightful command about pure obedience until the end.

ιη (6:17) πλουσίων ὁδηγία ἐπὶ τὴν ὄντως ζωήν.

XVIII (6:17) Guidance to the rich about true life.

Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Τιμόθεον δευτέρας ἐπιστολῆς (785AB)

Chapters of the Second Letter to Timothy

α (1:3) ἔπαινος τῆς Τιμοθέου πίστεως, καὶ πρoτρoπὴ ὑπομονῆς κατὰ τὸ πρέπον τῇ χάριτι, ἐν ᾗ καὶ αὐτὸς, φησὶν, διακαρτερεῖ πάσχων.

I (1:3) Praise of Timothy’s faith, and encouragement to steadfastness, as befits faith, in which also he, he says, constantly endures suffering.

β (1:15) περὶ τῆς ἁρμοζούσης μεταδόσεως τῶν θείων δογμάτων.

II (1:15) About the proper sharing of the divine teachings.

γ (2:3) περὶ τῆς ἀφρόντιδος ἐν τῷ νῦν βίῳ πολιτείας ἐπὶ ταῖς ἀπόνοις τροφαῖς.

III (2:3) About citizenship in the present life being without worry, in sustenance without toil.

δ (2:11) περὶ τῆς εἰς Χριστὸν πίστεως, καὶ ὑπομονῆς, ἐπ᾽ ἐλπίδι ζωῆς.

IV (2:11) About faith in Christ and steadfastness, in hope of life.

ε (2:22) περὶ ὀρθῆς διδασκαλίας, καὶ βίου V (2:22) About right teaching and a pure, καθαροῦ, εἰρηνικοῦ, καὶ κατὰ τῶν ἐναντίων. peaceful life, and against the adversaries. Ĵ (3:1) πρόῤῥησις περὶ κακίας ἀνθρώπων πλεοναζούσης, ἀπατηλῆς, ἐλεγχομένης.

VI (3:1) Prediction about men of utter wickedness, which will deceive and then be refuted.




57

͋ϣϲрϩϟϧϟ
o
$IBQUFST

ζ (3:10) προτροπὴ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ μιμήσεως ἐξ ἐναντίου τοῖς φαύλοις, ἐν ὑπακοῇ θεοῦ.

VII (3:10) Encouragement to imitate him rather than evil persons, in obedience to God.

η (4:3) περὶ τῶν καινοτομησάντων, οἷς ἀντιτάττει τὸν Τιμόθεον.

VIII (4:3) About the innovators, with whom they oppose Timothy.

θ (4:6) περὶ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ μελλούσης ἀναλύσεως ἐπὶ δόξῃ αἰωνίᾳ.

IX (4:6) About his coming death to eternal glory.

Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Τίτον ἐπιστολῆς (785BC)

Chapters of the Letter to Titus

α (1:5) περὶ διδασκάλων ἐπιτηδείων εἰς διακονίαν, καὶ ἔλεγχον ἀπειθῶν.

I (1:5) About teachers who are suitable for service and for refuting the disobedient.

β (1:10) κατὰ τῶν σαρκικὰς καθάρσεις πρεσβευόντων, καὶ ὑπὲρ πνευματικῆς ἀρετῆς.

II (1:10) Against those who esteem purifications of the flesh, even more than spiritual virtue.

γ (2:1) παραινέσεις, ἃς δεῖ παραινεῖν καθ᾽ ἡλικίαν ἑκάστοις. δ (2:9) περὶ δούλων, ὡς ἂν καὶ αὐτοὶ τῆς Χριστοῦ χάριτος ἀξίως δουλεύοιεν.

ε (3:1) περὶ ἀρχόντων ὑπακοῆς πρεπούσης τῇ ἐπιεικείᾳ τοῦ Χριστοῦ, Ĵ (3:10) παραίνεσις περὶ τoῦ ἐκκλίνειν τοὺς ἐριστικοὺς ζητητάς.

III (2:1) Exhortations that he should give to everybody according to their age. IV (2:9) On servants, how also they can serve in a way worthy of the grace of Christ. V (3:1) On obedience to rulers, as befits the mildness of Christ. VI (3:10) Exhortation to evade seditious inquirers.

Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Φιλήμονα ἐπιστολῆς (789A)

Chapters of the Letter to Philemon

α (1:4) ἔπαινος Φιλήμονος καὶ εὐχαριστία ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ.

I (1:4) Praise of Philemon, and thanksgiving for him.

β (1:10) σύστασις Ὀνησίμου φυγάδος οἰκέτου, καὶ παράκλησις ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ σωθέντος διὰ πίστεως.

II (1:10) Commendment of Onesimus, a runaway slave, and an appeal for him, since he has been saved by faith.

58

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

Κεφάλαια τῆς πρὸς Ἑβραίους ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶
"o$

Chapters of the Letter to the Hebrews

α (1:1) θεολογία Χριστοῦ ἐν δόξῃ πατρὸς καὶ ἐξουσίᾳ τῶν πάντων, μετὰ τῆς καθάρσεως τῶν ἐπὶ γῆς, ἀφ᾽ ἧς ἀνέβη εἰς τὴν ἐπουράνιον δόξαν.

I (1:1) Doctrine of Christ, in the glory of the Father and in power over all things, with power to cleanse those on earth, from where he ascended to heavenly glory.

β (1:5) ὅτι οὐ λειτουργικὴ ἡ δόξα Χριστοῦ, II (1:5) That the glory of Christ is not that ἀλλὰ θεικὴ καὶ ποιητική· διὸ οὐκ ἐπὶ τοῦ of ministers, but divine and creating. For παρόντος αἰῶνος, ἐν ᾧ οἱ λειτουργοὶ, ἀλλ᾽ that reason it is not in the present age, in ἐπὶ τῆς μελλούσης οἰκουμένης. which there are ministers, but in the world to come. γ (2:9) ὅτι ἐσαρκώθη κατὰ διάθεσιν, καὶ συμπάθειαν, καὶ οἰκειότητα, τὴν πρὸς ἡμᾶς, ἐπὶ σωτηρίᾳ ἀνθρώπων, τῇ ἐκ θανάτου, διὰ τῆς πρὸς αὐτὸν οἰκειώσεως.

III (2:9) That he became flesh as regards his state, in sympathy and in kinship with us, to save men from death, to make us his own.

δ (3:1) ὅτι πιστευτέον Χριστῷ, ὡς Μωυσεῖ ἐπίστευσαν, καθ᾽ ὑπερoχὴν δὲ, τὴν θεοῦ πρὸς ἄνθρωπον, ἐν ᾧ (3:12) ὅτι φοβητέον τῶν πάλαι τὴν ἔκπτωσιν.

IV (3:1) That our belief in Christ should be as their belief in Moses, but overwhelmingly greater, just as God is greater than man. In this: (3:12) That we should fear the fall of the people in the old days.

ε (4:1) προτροπὴ σπουδάσαι εἰς τὴν προδηλουμένην κατάπαυσιν.

V (4:1) Encouragement to strive for the relief that has been foretold.

Ĵ (4:11) τὸ φοβερὸν τῆς κρίσεως παρὰ τοῦ λόγου, διὰ πάντων, καὶ τὸ χρηστὸν τῆς χάριτος τῆς ἱερατικῆς παρὰ τῷ ὁμοιοπαθήσαντι ἡμῖν ἀνθρωπίνως.

VI (4:11) The horror of judgment by the Word that [cuts] through everything, and the goodness of the priestly grace of Him who, in a human way, suffered like us.

ζ (5:11) ἐπιτίμησις ὡς ἔτι δεομένοις εἰσαγωγῆς, ἐν ᾧ (6:4) προτροπὴ εἰς ἐπίδοσιν, ὡς οὐκ οὔσης δευτέρας ἀρχῆς, (6:9) παράκλησις σὺν ἐπαίνῳ.

VII (5:11) Rebuke for still being in need of basic instruction. In this: (6:4) Encouragement to progress, as there is no second beginning. (6:9) Admonition with praise.

η (6:13) ὅτι βεβαία ἡ ἐπαγγελία τοῦ θεοῦ, VIII (6:13) That the promise of God is safe, καὶ ταῦτα σὺν ὅρκῳ. and this through an oath.




͋ϣϲрϩϟϧϟ
o
$IBQUFST

59

θ (7:1) περὶ Μελχισέδεκ τοῦ εἰς Χριστὸν τύπου κατὰ τὸ ὄνομα, καὶ τὴν πόλιν, καὶ τὴν ζωὴν, καὶ τὴν ἱερωσύνην, ἐν ᾧ (7:6) ὅτι καὶ τοῦ Αβραὰμ προετιμήθη.

IX (7:1) About Melchisedek, the type of Christ, according to his name, his city, his life and his priesthood. In this: (7:6) That he was more honored than even Abraham.

ι (7:11) ὅτι παύσεται ἡ τοῦ Ἀαρὼν ἱερωσύνη, ἡ ἐπὶ γῆς οὖσα· ἵσταται δὲ ἡ οὐράνιος ἡ Χριστοῦ ἐξ ἑτέρου γένους, οὐ κατὰ σάρκα, οὐ διὰ νόμου σαρκίνου.

X (7:11) That the earthly priesthood of Aaron comes to an end, but the heavenly priesthood of Christ is established of another kind, not according to the flesh, and not through the law of the flesh.

ια (8:7) ὑπεροχὴ τῆς δευτέρας διαθήκης παρὰ τὴν προτέραν ἐν ἱλασμῷ καὶ ἁγιασμῷ.

XI (8:7) The supremacy of the second covenant over the first, because of forgiveness and sanctification.

ιβ (9:11) περὶ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἐν ᾧ ἡ νέα διαθήκη. ὅτι τοῦτο ἀληθὲς καθάρσιον εἰς ἀεὶ, οὐ τὰ ἐν αἵμασι ζώων τοῖς πολλάκις προσαγομένοις.

XII (9:11) About the blood of Christ, through which the new covenant [was established], because this is the true cleansing for all time, not the blood of animals, which is frequently repeated.

ιγ (10:5) μαρτυρία περὶ τῆς μόνης καθάρσεως, καὶ προσαγωγῆς πρὸς θεὸν, ἐν ᾧ (10:19) προτροπὴ τῆς ἐν πίστει προσόδου.

XIII (10:5) Testimony about the only cleansing and access to God. In this: (10:19) Encouragement to progress in faith.

ιδ (10:24) προτροπὴ σπουδῆς κατὰ φόβον τῆς ἐγγιζούσης κρίσεως. ιε (10:32) περὶ τοῦ καλὴν ἀρχὴν εἰς καλὸν τέλος προαγαγεῖν. ιĴ (11:1) περὶ πίστεως τῆς καὶ τοὺς παλαιοὺς δοξασάσης. ιζ (12:1) περὶ ὑπομονῆς τῆς ἐν ἀκολουθήσει Χριστοῦ. ιη (12:12) περὶ σωφροσύνης ἕως καιρὸς κατορθώσεως, μὴ ἀποτύχωμεν αὐτῆς, ὡς Ἠσαῦ, μὴ εὑρὼν τόπον μετανοίας.

XIV (10:24) Encouragement to be zealous, in fear of the coming judgment. XV (10:32) About moving from a good beginning to a good end. XVI (11:1) About faith, which also has glorified the elders. XVII (12:1) About endurance, following Christ. XVIII (12:12) About temperance until the new order is established, that we may not lose it, like Esau, who found no place of repentance.

60

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

ιθ (12:18) ὅτι φοβερώτερα τῶν ἐπὶ Μωυσέως τὰ μέλλοντα, καὶ πλείονος ἄξια σπουδῆς τὰ νῦν.

XIX (12:18) That the things to come are more terrifying than what happened at the time of Moses, and that the present time demands greater zeal.

κ (13:1) περὶ φιλαδελφίας καὶ φιλοξενίας, ἐν ᾧ (13:4) περὶ σωφροσύνης, (13:5) περὶ αὐταρκείας, (13:7) περὶ μιμήσεως πατέρων.

XX (13:1) About brotherly love and hospitality. In this: (13:4) About temperance. (13:5) About sufficiency. (13:7) About imitation of the fathers.

κα (13:9) περὶ τοῦ μὴ σωματικῶς ζῇν κατὰ νόμον, ἀλλὰ πνευματικῶς κατὰ Χριστὸν ἐν ἀρετῇ.

XXI (13:9) About not living bodily according to the Law, but spiritually, according to Christ in virtue.

κβ (13:20) εὐχὴ πρὸς θεὸν περὶ τῆς εἰς ἀρετὴν ἀγωγῆς καὶ οἰκονομίας.

XXII (13:20) Prayer to God for his rule and guidance to virtue.

Κεφάλαια τῆς Ἰακώβου ἐπιστολῆς (677AD)

Chapters of the Letter of James

α (1:1) περὶ ὑπομονῆς καὶ πίστεως ἀδιακρίτου, καὶ περὶ ταπεινοφροσύνης πρὸς τοὺς πλουσίους, ἐν ᾧ (1:13) περὶ τῆς ἐν ἡμῖν πυρώσεως καὶ τῶν ἐξ αὐτῆς παθῶν, ὅτι οὐ παρὰ θεοῦ τὸ αἴτιον· εἴ τι γὰρ ἀγαθὸν ἡμῖν, παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ.

I (1:1) About steadfastness and firm faith. To the rich: About humility. In this: (1:13) About the desire in us and the passions [that arise] from it, that they are not caused by God. If something good [befalls us, it is] from Him.

β (1:19) περὶ πραΰτητος καὶ ἁγνείας καὶ πράξεως ἀγαθῆς μεταδοτικῆς ἐπὶ μακαρισμῷ, καὶ περὶ ἐπιστήμης καὶ συμμετρίας λόγου.

II (1:19) About mildness, chastity and good behavior, giving us a share in the blessing. And about wise and suitable speech.

γ (2:1) περὶ τῆς πρὸς ἕκαστον ἀγάπης ἀπροσωπολήμπτου κατὰ τὸν νόμον.

III (2:1) About love toward everyone, regardless of persons, according to the Law.

δ (2:14) ὅτι οὐκ ἐκ πίστεως μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐξ ἔργων· καὶ οὐκ ἐκ θατέρου ἰδικῶς, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξ ἀμφοῖν ἅμα δικαιοῦται ἄνθρωπος.

IV (2:14) That one not by faith alone, but also by works, not by one of them separately, but by both together, is justified.

ε (3:1) ὅτι ἡ προπετὴς καὶ ἄτακτος γλῶσσα θανατοῖ τὸν κεκτημένον,

V (3:1) That the reckless and unruly tongue destroys its master, and that it must be controlled for praise and glory to God.




61

͋ϣϲрϩϟϧϟ
o
$IBQUFST

ἧς κρατεῖν ἀνάγκη εἰς εὐφημίαν καὶ δόξαν τοῦ θεοῦ, ἐν ᾧ (3:13) περὶ ἀναστροφῆς καὶ ἀγαθῆς καὶ ἀμάχου πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἐκ φιλοδοξίας τῆς ἐπὶ σοφίᾳ ἀνθρωπίνῃ, (3:17) περὶ θείας σοφίας, (4:1) ὅτι ἐκ ῥᾳθυμίας καὶ φιληδονίας ἔρις, καὶ ἀκαταστασία, καὶ ἡ πρὸς θεὸν ἔχθρα γίνεται, (4:8) περὶ μετανοίας πρὸς σωτηρίαν, καὶ περὶ τοῦ μὴ κρίνειν τὸν πλησίον.

In this: (3:13) About good and peaceful behavior toward each other, far from love of glory which is based on human wisdom. (3:17) About divine wisdom. (4:1) That strife, confusion and enmity with God come from carelessness and love of pleasure. (4:8) About repentance for salvation, and about not judging your neighbor.

Ĵ (4:13) ὅτι οὐκ ἐν ἀνθρώπῳ, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν τῷ VI (4:13) That the steps of man are ordered θεῷ τὰ διαβήματα ἀνδρὸς κατευθύνεται, by God, not by man. In this: ἐν ᾧ (5:1) περὶ πλεονεξίας πλουσίων καὶ (5:1) About the avarice of the rich, their τῆς ἐν κόσμῳ τρυφῆς αὐτῶν, καὶ περὶ luxury in the world and the righteous judgment of God. δικαιοκρισίας θεοῦ, (5:7) περὶ μακροθυμίας καὶ ὑπομονῆς (5:7) About steadfastness, endurance of sufferings, and truth. παθημάτων, καὶ περὶ ἀληθείας, (5:13) παραινέσεις ἰδικαὶ ἑκάστῳ (5:13) Specific exhortations to various individuals, with faith. προσήκουσαι μετὰ πίστεως, (5:19) ὅτι διακονητέον τῇ τοῦ πλησίον (5:19) That we should be concerned about the salvation of our neighbor. σωτηρίᾳ.

Κεφάλαια Πέτρου ἐπιστολῆς ɀϮьϰϥ϶
$o#

Chapters of the First Letter of Peter

α (1:1) περὶ τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ ἀναγεννήσεως, καὶ περὶ ὑπομονῆς πειρασμῶν, καὶ περὶ σωτηριώδους πίστεως προκατηγγελμένης ὑπὸ τῶν προφητῶν.

I (1:1) About regeneration in Christ, about steadfastness against temptations, and about the saving faith that was announced earlier by the prophets.

β (1:13) περὶ ἐλπίδος, καὶ ἁγιασμοῦ τῆς τε ὀφειλομένης ἐπὶ τῇ υἱοθεσίᾳ ἀσφαλοῦς ἀναστροφῆς.

II (1:13) About hope and sanctification, and about the unfailing behavior owed because of the adoption.

γ (2:1) περὶ τοῦ ἐπαξίως τῆς υἱοθεσίας ζῇν ἐν Χριστῷ πρὸς ὠφέλειαν καὶ τῶν ἔξωθεν, εἰς δόξαν θεοῦ.

III (2:1) About living in Christ in a manner worthy of the adoption, to the benefit of those outside, to the glory of God.

δ (2:13) περὶ τῆς πρὸς τοὺς ἄρχοντας ὑποταγῆς, καὶ φιλαδελφίας καὶ θεοσεβείας, ἐν ᾧ

IV (2:13) About obedience to rulers, brotherly love and reverence toward God. In this:

62

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

(2:18) περὶ δούλων ὑποταγῆς καὶ ἀνεξικάκου ὑπομονῆς διὰ Χριστὸν, (3:1) περὶ ὑπακοῆς γυναικῶν, καὶ ὁμονοίας τῆς πρὸς τοὺς ἄνδρας καὶ σωτηρίας τῆς ἐν πνευματι, εἰς τύπον Σάῤῥας, (3:7) περὶ τῆς ἀνδρῶν πρὸς γυναῖκας συμπεριφορᾶς, (3:8) περὶ τῆς πρὸς ἅπαντας ἐπιεικοῦς ἀνεξικακίας, ἧς τύπος ἦν ἡ ἐπὶ Νῶε τοῦ θεοῦ φιλανθρωπία· ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς δὲ ἡ διὰ τοῦ βαπτίσματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ συμπάθεια.

(2:18) About obedience of slaves and forbearing endurance because of Christ. (3:1) About obedience of wives and concord with their husbands, and about salvation in the spirit, after the model of Sara. (3:7) About the kindness of men to their wives. (3:8) About mild endurance toward all. The model of this is the benevolence of God toward Noah and the compassion for us through the baptism of Christ.

ε (4:1) περὶ ἀποθέσεως φαύλων πράξεων, V (4:1) About laying off evil works and reκαὶ ἐπαναλήψεως τῶν ἐν πνεύματι καρπῶν suming the fruits of the Spirit according to κατὰ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν χαρισμάτων. the diversity of the gifts. Ĵ (4:12) ὅτι κοινωνίᾳ τῇ πρὸς Χριστὸν κρατεῖν χρὴ τῶν φυσικῶν παθῶν, ἐλπίδι τε τῇ εἰς αὐτὸν φέρειν τὰς παρ᾽ ἑτέρων πάθας.

VI (4:12) That in fellowship with Christ it is necessary to control the natural passions and to bear the injuries inflicted by others, with hope in Him.

ζ (5:1) παραίνεσις πρεσβυτέρων περὶ ἐπισκοπῆς τοῦ ποιμνίου, ἐν ᾧ (5:5) περὶ κoινῆς πάντων πρὸς ἕκαστον ταπεινοφροσύνης εἰς νίκην τὴν κατὰ τοῦ διαβόλου.

VII (5:1) Advice to elders about care for the flock. In this: (5:5) About the common humility of all toward one another in order to vanquish the devil.

η (5:10) εὐχὴ ὑπὲρ τελειώσεως τῶν πιστευόντων.

VIII (5:10) Prayer for the perfection of the believers.

Κεφάλαια Πέτρου ἐπιστολῆς δευτέρας (684AB)

Chapters of the Second Letter of Peter

α (1:1) περὶ κλήσεως τῆς ἐν πίστει, ἔργοις βεβαιουμένης τοῖς τῆς ἀρετῆς, καὶ ἐλπίδι τῶν μελλόντων ἀγαθῶν.

I (1:1) About the call to faith, the call that is made firm by the deeds of virtue and by hope of good things to come.

β (1:10) παραγγελία εἰς ὑπόμνησιν τῆς διδασκαλίας μετὰ τὴν ἀνάλυσιν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ὅπως ἐν ὄρει Θαβὼρ τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ περὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ ἐπήκουσε φωνῆς.

II (1:10) Command to remember the teaching after his death. How he heard the voice of God about the Son on Mount Tabor.




63

͋ϣϲрϩϟϧϟ
o
$IBQUFST

γ (2:1) πρόῤῥησις ἀπατηλῆς ἐπαναστάσεως αἱρετικῶν, ἀσεβείας τε αὐτῶν, καὶ μελλούσης κολάσεως.

III (2:1) Prediction of the deceitful rise of the heretics, their impiety and their punishment in the future.

δ (3:1) ἐπανάληψις περὶ κακίας ἀνθρώπων αἱρετικῶν, ἐν ᾧ (3:10) ὅτι αἰφνιδίως ἥξει Χριστὸς ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τοῦδε τοῦ αἰῶνος, ὥστε δεῖν εὐτρεπίζεσθαι πάσῃ ἀρετῇ.

IV (3:1) Repetition about the wickedness of the heretics. In this: (3:10) That Christ will come suddenly toward the end of this world, hence one should prepare oneself in every virtue.

Κεφάλαια Ἰωάννου ἐπιστολῆς ɀϮьϰϥ϶
#o"

Chapters of the First Letter of John

α (1:1) ἐπαγγελικὴ θεολογία περὶ Χριστοῦ, ἐν ᾧ (1:6) περὶ ἐξομολογήσεως, καὶ προσοχῆς εἰς τὸ μὴ ἁμαρτάνειν, (2:3) ὅτι ἡ τήρησις ἐντολῶν θεοῦ, τὴν γνῶσιν βεβαιοῖ.

I (1:1) Teaching according to the promise on the divine, about Christ. In this: (1:6) About confession and taking care not to sin. (2:3) That adherence to the precepts of God strengthens knowledge.

β (2:7) περὶ ἀγάπης, ἧς ἄνευ ἀσέβεια, ἐν ᾧ (2:12) παραίνεσις περὶ χάριτος ἑκάστου καθ᾽ ἡλικίαν, καὶ περὶ ἀποτροπῆς τῆς πρὸς τὸν κόσμον ἀγάπης.

II (2:7) About love, without which impiety prevails. In this: (2:12) Exhortation about the grace of everyone according to his age and to avert loving of the world.

γ (2:18) περὶ ψευδαδέλφων ἀρνησιθέων, καὶ ὅτι ἡ εἰς Χριστὸν εὐσέβεια, πατρὸς ὁμολογία· ἡ γὰρ τοῦ πατρὸς δοξολογία, τοῦ υἱοῦ ἐστι θεολογία, ἐν ᾧ (2:26) περὶ θείου καὶ πνευματικοῦ χαρίσματος ἐν ἁγιασμῷ ἐπ᾽ ἐλπίδι εἰς γνῶσιν θεοῦ, (3:2) ὅτι πᾶς ὁ ἐν Χριστῷ ἐκτὸς ἁμαρτίας· ὁ γὰρ ἁμαρτάνων ἐστὶν ἐκ τοῦ διαβόλου.

III (2:18) About false brethren who deny God. That piety toward Christ is to confess the Father, for praise of the father is to recognize the divinity of Christ. In this: (2:26) About the divine and spiritual gift in sanctification, with hope of knowledge of God. (3:2) That everyone who is in Christ is without sin. For the sinner is of the devil.

δ (3:9 or 10b) περὶ ἀγάπης τῆς εἰς τὸν IV (3:9 or 10b) About love of our neighbor πλησίον, καὶ διαθέσεως μεταδοτικῆς, ἐν ᾧ and a sharing disposition. In this: (3:19) περὶ συνειδήσεως ἀγαθῆς, τῆς ἐν (3:19) About good conscience, with faith πίστει Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, in Jesus Christ. (4:1) περὶ διακρίσεως πνευμάτων ἐφ᾽ (4:1) About testing the spirits by the conὁμολογίᾳ τῆς τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐνανθρωπήσεως. fession of the incarnated Christ. ε (4:7) περὶ φιλαδελφίας εἰς θεοσέβειαν.

V (4:7) About brotherly love in piety.

64

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

Ĵ (4:15 or 5:1) περὶ θεολογίας υἱοῦ ἐν δόξῃ πατρὸς, καὶ περὶ νίκης τῆς κατὰ τοῦ πονηροῦ διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς ζωήν.

VI (4:15 or 5:1) About divine teaching on the Son in the glory of the Father. About victory over the evil one through faith in Jesus Christ unto life.

ζ (5:16) περὶ ἀντιλήψεως τοῦ ἁμαρτάνοντος VII (5:16) About helping the brother who ἀδελφοῦ διὰ προσευχῆς, καὶ περὶ τοῦ μὴ sins, through prayer. About abstaining from sin. In this: ἁμαρτάνειν, ἐν ᾧ (5:18) About staying away from the wor(5:18) περὶ ἀποχῆς δαιμονικοῦ σεβάσματος. ship of demons.

Kεφάλαια Ἰωάννου ἐπιστολῆς δευτέρας (688B)

Chapters of the Second Letter of John

α (1:4) μετὰ τὸ προοίμιoν, περὶ ὀρθοῦ βίου ἐν ἀγάπῃ θεοῦ διὰ πίστεως εὐσεβοῦς ἀμεταθέτου, ἐν ᾧ (1:10) ὅτι οὐ δεῖ αἱρετικὸν εἰσοικίζειν, ἢ χαιρετίζειν ἐφ᾽ ἁμαρτίᾳ.

I (1:4) After the prooemium, on a righteous life in the love of God through pious, unchangeable faith. In this: (1:10) That one should not let heretics live in the house or greet them, because of sin.

β (1:12) ἐπαγγελία παρουσίας αὐτοῦ ἐπ᾽ II (1:12) Announcement of his arrival, in hope that it will be beneficial. ἐλπίδι πρὸς ὠφέλειαν.

Κεφάλαια Ἰωάννου ἐπιστολῆς ϰϮцϰϥ϶
%o"

Chapters of the Third Letter of John

α (1:2) εὐχὴ ὑπὲρ τελειώσεως, καὶ εὐχαριστίας ἐφ᾽ ὁμολογίᾳ φιλοξενίας τῶν ἀδελφῶν διὰ Xριστὸν, ἐν ᾧ (1:9) περὶ τῆς Διοτρέφους φαυλότητος καὶ μισαδελφίας.

I (1:2) Prayer for perfection, and thanksgiving for the testimony of the brethren to [his] hospitality for the sake of Christ. In this: (1:9) About the wickedness of Diotrephes and his hate for the brethren.

β (1:12) περὶ Δημητρίου, ᾧ μαρτυρεῖ τὰ κάλλιστα.

II (1:12) About Demetrius, to whom he gives the best testimony.

γ (1:13) περὶ ἀφίξεως αὐτοῦ πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἐπ᾽ ὠφελείᾳ ἐν τάχει.

III (1:13) About his imminent arrival to them, for their benefit.




͋ϣϲрϩϟϧϟ
o
$IBQUFST

65

Κεφάλαια τῆς Ἰoύδα ἐπιστολῆς (689CD)

Chapters of the Letter of Jude

α (1:3) περὶ προσοχῆς τῆς εἰς Χριστὸν πίστεως διὰ τὴν ἐπανάστασιν τῶν ἀσεβῶν καὶ ἀσελγῶν ἀνδρῶν, ἐν ᾧ (1:5) περὶ μελλούσης αὐτῶν κολάσεως καθ᾽ ὁμοίωσιν τῶν πάλαι ἁμαρτωλῶν τε καὶ πονηρῶν.

I (1:3) About devotion to faith in Christ, because of the rise of impious and immoral men. In this: (1:5) About their coming punishment, in likeness to the sins and evil deeds of the old days.

β (1:11) ταλανισμὸς αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τῇ πλάνῃ, καὶ δυσσεβείᾳ, καὶ ἀσελγείᾳ, καὶ βλασφημίᾳ, καὶ ἐπιπλάστῳ ὑποκρίσει τῆς εἰς ἀπάτην δωροδοκίας.

II (1:11) Rebuke for error, impiety, immorality, mockery, and their false and deceptive acts to obtain gifts.

γ (1:17 or 20) περὶ ἀσφαλείας αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τῇ πίστει, συμπαθείας τε καὶ φειδοῦς τοῦ πλησίον, ἐπὶ σωτηρίᾳ ἐν ἁγιασμῷ.

III (1:17 or 20) About their firmness in faith, their compassion, and their mildness toward their neighbor, for salvation in sanctification.

δ (1:24) εὐχὴ ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν εἰς ἁγιασμὸν, καὶ παῤῥησίαν καθαρὰν σὺν δοξολογίᾳ θεοῦ.

IV (1:24) Prayer for their sanctification and pure assurance, with praise of God.

Ἔκθεσις κεφαλαίων τῶν ɀϮрϬϣϵϫ
#o#

Survey of the Chapters of the Acts

Ἐκ πατέρων ἡμεῖς καὶ διδασκάλων τὸν τρόπον καὶ τὸν τύπον ὠφελημένοι, ἐγχειροῦμεν μετρίως τῇδε τῶν κεφαλαίων ἐκθέσει, αἰτοῦντες συγγνώμην προπετείας ἡμεῖς, οἱ νέοι χρόνων τε, καὶ μαθημάτων παρ᾽ ὑμῶν ἑκάστου τῶν ἀναγινωσκόντων, εὐχῇ τῇ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, τὴν συμπεριφορὰν κομιζόμενοι. ἐκτιθέμεθα γοῦν αὐτὴν καθ᾽ ἱστορίαν Λουκᾶ τοῦ εὐαγγελιστοῦ καὶ συγγραφέως, τοιγαροῦν διὰ μὲν τοῦ μέλανος αὐτοτελῆ τὰ κεφάλαια· διὰ δὲ τοῦ κινναβάρεως τὰς ἐν μέρει τούτων ἐχομένας ὑποδιαιρέσεις ἐσημειωσάμεθα.

Benefiting from the style and model of fathers and teachers, we present this mediocre survey of the chapters. We, the young in age and in learning, ask every reader for forgiveness for our rashness, receiving kindness through your prayers for our sake. We now present this survey of the story of Luke, the evangelist and historian. We indicated the complete chapters in black ink, and the subdivisions contained in them in red ink.

α (1:1) περὶ τῆς ἐξ ἀναστάσεως διδασκαλίας Χριστοῦ καὶ ὀπτασίας πρὸς τοὺς μαθητὰς, καὶ περὶ ἐπαγγελίας τῆς τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος δωρεᾶς, θέας τε καὶ τρόπου

I (1:1) About the teaching of Christ after the resurrection, the vision the disciples saw, the promise of the gift of the Holy

66

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

τῆς ἀναλήψεως τοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ περὶ τῆς ἐνδόξου δευτέρας αὐτοῦ παρουσίας.

Spirit, how they saw the ascension of Christ, and his glorious second coming.

β (1:15) Πέτρου διάλογος πρὸς τοὺς μαθητευθέντας περὶ θανάτου καὶ ἀποβολῆς Ἰούδα τοῦ προδότου, ἐν ᾧ (1:23) περὶ ἀντεισαγωγῆς Ματθίου κληρωθέντος χάριτι θεοῦ διὰ προσευχῆς.

II (1:15) Peter’s speech to the disciples about the death and rejection of Judas the traitor. In this: (1:23) about the substitution by Matthias, who was chosen through prayer by the grace of God.

γ (2:1) περὶ θείας τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος ἐπιφοιτήσεως ἐν ἡμέρᾳ πεντεκοστῆς, γενομένης εἰς τοὺς πιστεύσαντας, ἐν ᾧ (2:14) Πέτρου κατήχησις περὶ τούτου ἐκ τῶν προφητῶν, (2:22) περὶ πάθους, καὶ ἀναστάσεως καὶ ἀναλήψεως Χριστοῦ, δωρεᾶς τε τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος, (2:37) περὶ πίστεως τῶν παρόντων, καὶ τῆς διὰ τοῦ βαπτίσματος αὐτῶν σωτηρίας,

III (2:1) About the coming of the divine Holy Spirit to the believers on the day of Pentecost. In this: (2:14) The teaching of Peter from the prophets about Him. (2:22) About the passion, resurrection and ascension of Christ and the gift of the Holy Spirit. (2:37) About the faith of those who were present and their salvation through baptism. (2:42) About concord for common benefit, and the growth of the faithful.

(2:42) περὶ ὁμονοίας κοινωφελοῦς, καὶ προσθήκης τῶν πιστευόντων. δ (3:1) περὶ τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ θεραπείας τοῦ ἐκ γεννητῆς χωλοῦ, Πέτρου τε κατηχήσεως ἐλεγκτικῆς, συμπαθητικῆς, συμβουλευτικῆς πρὸς σωτηρίαν αὐτῶν, ἐν ᾧ (4:5) ἐπιστασία τῶν ἀρχιερέων, ζήλῳ τοῦ γεγονότος, καὶ κρίσις τοῦ θαύματος, Πέτρου τε ὁμολογία τῆς Χριστοῦ δυνάμεως τε καὶ χάριτος, (4:15) περὶ ἀπειλῆς τῶν ἀρχιερέων, ὡς οὐ δεῖ παρρησιάζεσθαι ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ ἀνέσεως τῶν ἀποστόλων, (4:24) εὐχαριστία ἀπὸ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ὑπὲρ τῆς τῶν ἀποστόλων πίστης καρτερίας.

IV (3:1) About the healing in Christ of the man who was lame from birth, and about the reproaching, compassionate and persuasive teaching of Peter for their salvation. In this: (4:5) Investigation of the high priests as they were concerned about the event, their decision about the miracle, and Peter’s confession of the power and grace of Christ. (4:15) About the threat from the high priests, that they ordered them not to speak openly in the name of Christ, and their dismissal of the apostles. (4:24) Thanksgiving from the Church for the faithful strength of the apostles.

ε (4:32) περὶ ὁμοψύχου, καὶ καθολικῆς κοινωνίας τῶν πιστευσάντων, ἐν ᾧ (5:1) περὶ Ἀνανίου καὶ Σαπφείρας, καὶ πικρᾶς αὐτῶν τελευτῆς.

V (4:32) About the believers being of one soul and sharing everything with one another. In this: (5:1) About Ananias and Sapphira and their cruel end.




͋ϣϲрϩϟϧϟ
o
$IBQUFST

67

Ĵ (5:12) ὅτι τοὺς ἀποστόλους ἐμβληθέντας VI (5:12) That the imprisoned apostles ἐν τῷ δεσμωτηρίῳ ὁ ἄγγελος κυρίου were saved at night by the angel of the Lord, ϫъϨϰϵϮ
ГϬтϯϵϯϣϫ1, ἐπιτρέψας ἀκωλύτως who let them preach Jesus unhindered. In this: κηρύσσειν τὸν Ἰησοῦν, ἐν ᾧ (5:27) That the high priests caught them (5:27) ὅτι τῇ ἑξῆς αὐτοὺς οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς πάλιν again the next day, had them beaten and συλλαβόμενοι, ἐφ᾽ ᾧ μηκέτι διδάσκειν, dismissed them, having ordered them no μαστίξαντες ἀπέλυσαν. longer to teach. (5:34) Γαμαλιήλου γνώμη πιστὴ περὶ τῶν (5:34) The trustworthy opinion of Gamaliel ἀποστόλων μετὰ παραδειγμάτων τινῶν about the apostles, with some examples and proofs. καὶ ἀποδείξεων. ζ (6:1) περὶ χειροτονίας τῶν ἑπτὰ διακόνων.

VII (6:1) The election of the seven deacons.

η (6:8) Ἰουδαίων ἐπανάστασις καὶ VIII (6:8) The insurrection and false acσυκοφαντία κατὰ Στεφάνου, αὐτοῦ τε cusation by the Jews against Stephen, and δημηγορία περὶ τῆς πρὸς Ἀβραὰμ διαθήκης his speech about the covenant of God with τοῦ θεoῦ, καὶ περὶ τῶν δώδεκα πατριαρχῶν, Abraham and about the twelve patriarchs. In this: ἐν ᾧ (7:11) The events of the famine, the buying (7:11) τὰ περὶ τοῦ λιμοῦ καὶ πυρωνίας καὶ 1 and the recognition [of Joseph] of wheat ἀναγνωρισμοῦ τῶν υἱῶν Ἰακὼβ, καὶ περὶ by the sons of Jacob, about the birth of γενέσεως Μωυσέως καὶ τῆς πρὸς αὐτὸν Moses and the revelation of God on Mount θεοφανείας ἐν ὄρει Σινᾷ γενομένης, Sinai. (7:35) περὶ τῆς ἐξόδου καὶ μοσχοποιΐας τοῦ (7:35) About the exodus of Israel and the Ἰσραὴλ ἄχρι χρόνων Σολομῶντος, καὶ τῆς making of the calf, up to the time of Solomon and the building of the temple. τοῦ ναοῦ κατασκευῆς, (7:55) Confession of the heavenly glory of (7:55) ὁμολογία τῆς ὑπερουρανίου δόξης Jesus Christ that was revealed to Stephen. Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἀποκαλυφθείσης αὐτῷ, Because of this, he was stoned and died a ἐφ᾽ ᾗ λιθόλευστος γενόμενος Στέφανος pious death. εὐσεβῶς ἐκοιμήθη. Ϧ
C

Гϡтϫϣϰϭ
Ϣс
ɀϣϮх
ϢϧϵϡϪϭѼ
ϰѮ϶
IX (8:1b) About the persecution of the Church and the burial of Stephen. In this: ἐκκλησίας καὶ ταφῆς Στεφάνου, ἐν ᾧ (8:5) About Philip the apostle who healed (8:5) περὶ Φιλίππου τοῦ ἀποστόλου many in Samaria. πολλοὺς ἰασαμένου ἐπὶ τῆς Σαμαρείας. ι (8:9) περὶ Σίμωνος τοῦ μάγου πιστεύσαντος, καὶ βαπτισθέντος σὺν ἑτέροις πλείοσιν, ἐν ᾧ (8:14) περὶ τῆς Πέτρου καὶ Ἰωάννου πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἀποστολῆς, καὶ ἐπίκλησις τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος ἐπὶ τοὺς βαπτισθέντας.

X (8:9) About Simon Magus, who believed and was baptized with many others. In this: (8:14) About the sending of Peter and John to them, and the invocation of the Holy Spirit upon those who were baptized.

1

1

Emendation suggested by Jerker Blomqvist.

Jerker Blomqvist explained this word to me.

68

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

ια (8:18) ὅτι οὐ δι᾽ ἀργυρίου, οὐδὲ ὑποκριταῖς, ἀλλ᾽ ἁγίοις διὰ πίστεως ἡ μετοχὴ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος δίδοται, ἐν ᾧ (8:20) τὰ περὶ ὑποκρίσεως, καὶ ἐπιπλήξεως Σίμωνος.

XI (8:18) That communion with the Holy Spirit is not given through money and not to hypocrites, but to saints, through faith. In this: (8:20) About the hypocrisy of Simon, and about the rebuke of him.

ιβ (8:26) ὅτι τοῖς ἀγαθοῖς καὶ πιστοῖς εὐοδοῖ ὁ θεὸς τὴν σωτηρίαν, δῆλον ἐκ τῆς κατὰ τὸν εὐνοῦχον ὑποθέσεως.

XII (8:26) That God prepares salvation for the good and faithful, shown by the example of the eunuch.

ιγ (9:1) περὶ τῆς οὐρανόθεν θείας κλήσεως Παύλου εἰς ἀποστολὴν Χριστοῦ, ἐν ᾧ (9:17) περὶ ἰάσεως καὶ βαπτίσματος Παύλου διὰ Ἀνανίου κατ᾽ ἀποκάλυψιν θεοῦ, παῤῥησίας τε αὐτοῦ, καὶ συντυχίας, τῆς διὰ Βαρναβᾶ πρὸς τοὺς ἀποστόλους.

XIII (9:1) About the divine and heavenly call of Paul to the apostleship of Christ. In this: (9:17) About the healing and baptism of Paul by Ananias, according to a revelation from God, his bold preaching, and his meeting with the apostles through Barnabas.

ιδ (9:32) περὶ Αἰνέα παραλυτικοῦ ἰαθέντος ἐν Λύδδῃ διὰ Πέτρου, ἐν ᾧ (9:35) τὰ περὶ Ταβιθὰ τῆς φιλοχήρου, ἣν ἤγειρεν ἐκ νεκρῶν ὁ Πέτρος διὰ προσευχῆς ἐν Ἰόππῃ.

XIV (9:32) About the lame Aeneas who was healed through Peter in Lydda. In this: (9:35) [The story of] Tabitha, the friend of the widows, whom Peter raised from the dead in Joppa through prayer.

ιε (10:1) περὶ Kορνηλίου, ὅσα τε πρὸς αὐτὸν ὁ ἄγγελος εἶπεν, καὶ ὅσα πάλιν πρὸς Πέτρον οὐρανόθεν περὶ κλήσεως ἐθνῶν ἐρρέθη, ἐν ᾧ (10:10) ὅτι μετασταλεὶς ὁ Πέτρος ἦλθεν πρὸς Κορνήλιον, (10:30) ἐπανάληψις ὧν ἐμαρτύρησε, καὶ ὑφηγήσατο ὁ ἄγγελος αὐτῷ Κορνηλίῳ, (10:34) Πέτρου κατήχησις εἰς Χριστὸν, τοῦ τε ἁγίου πνεύματος ἐπὶ τοὺς ἀκούοντας δωρεὰ, καὶ ὅπως ἐβαπτίσθησαν τότε οἱ ἐξ ἐθνῶν πιστεύσαντες.

XV (10:1) About Cornelius, both what the angel said to him and what was again said from heaven to Peter about the call to the Gentiles. In this: (10:10) Peter comes to Cornelius after he has sent for him. (10:30) Repetition of what the angel declared and what he instructed Cornelius. (10:34) The teaching of Peter about Christ. The gift of the Holy Spirit upon the listeners, and how the believers among the Gentiles then were baptized.

ιĴ (11:4) ὡς Πέτρος τὰ καθεξῆς, καὶ τὰ ἕκαστα τῶν γεγονότων διηγεῖται τοῖς ἀποστόλοις, διακριθεῖσι πρὸς αὐτὸν, (11:19) τὸ τηνικάδε τὸν Βαρναβᾶν ἐκπέμψασι πρὸς τοὺς ἐν Ἀντιοχείᾳ ἀδελφούς.

XVI (11:4) How Peter relates all that had happened from the beginning to the apostles, since they had doubted him. (11:19) About the sending of Barnabas at that time to the brethren in Antioch.




͋ϣϲрϩϟϧϟ
o
$IBQUFST

69

ιζ (11:27) προφητεία Ἀγάβου περὶ λιμοῦ οἰκουμενικῆς, καὶ καρποφορίας πρὸς τοὺς ἐν Ἀντιοχείᾳ ἀδελφούς.

XVII (11:27) Prophecy of Agabos about hunger all over the world, and about alms to the brethren in Antioch.

ιη (12:1) Ἰακώβου τοῦ ἀποστόλου κατασφαγὴ, ἐν ᾧ (12:3) Πέτρου σύλληψις πρὸς Ἡρώδου, ὅπως τε αὐτὸν ὁ ἄγγελος θείῳ κελεύσματι ἐξείλετο τῶν δεσμῶν, καὶ ὁ Πέτρος ἐμφανὴς γενόμενος νύκτωρ τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς ὑπανεχώρησεν, ἐν ᾧ (12:12) περὶ τῆς τῶν φυλάκων κολάσεως, καὶ μετέπειτα περὶ τῆς τοῦ ἀσεβοῦς Ἡρώδου πικρᾶς τε καὶ ὀλεθρίου καταστροφῆς.

XVIII (12:1) The slaughter of James the apostle. In this: (12:3) About the capture of Peter by Herod, how an angel at the Lord’s behest lead him out of prison, and how Peter departed after he had appeared to the disciples at night. In this: (12:12) About the punishment of the guards, and then about the cruel and deadly overthrow of the impious Herod.

ιθ (13:1) Ἀποστολὴ Βαρναβᾶ καὶ Παύλου πρὸς τοῦ θείου πνεύματος εἰς Κύπρον, ὅσα τε εἰργάσαντο ἐν ὀνόματι Χριστοῦ εἰς Ἐλύμαν τὸν μάγον.

XIX (13:1) About the mission to Cyprus by Barnabas and Paul, [guided] by the Holy Spirit, and what they did in the name of Jesus Christ to Elymas the sorcerer.

κ (13:16) Παύλου εὐθαλὴς διδασκαλία εἰς Χριστὸν ἔκ τε τοῦ νόμου καὶ καθεξῆς τῶν προφητῶν, ἱστορικὴ καὶ εὐαγγελικὴ, ἐν ᾧ (13:33) ὅτι ἐλεγκτικὴ καὶ συλλογιστική.

XX (13:16) About the flourishing teaching of Paul about Christ, historical and from the gospel, both from the Law and afterwards from the prophets. In this: (13:33) Refuting and syllogistic [arguments]. (13:44) (13:46?) About the preaching being turned to the Gentiles, and about their being persecuted there, and their arrival in Iconium.

(13:44) (13:46?) περὶ μεταθέσεως τοῦ κηρύγματος εἰς τὰ ἔθνη, διωγμοῦ τε αὐτῶν ἐκεῖ καὶ ἀφίξεως εἰς Ἰκόνιον.

κα (14:1) ὅπως ἐν Ἰκονίῳ κηρύξαντες τὸν Χριστὸν, πολλῶν τε πιστευσάντων, ἐδιώχθησαν οἱ ἀπόστολοι.

XXI (14:1) How the apostles were persecuted in Iconium after they had preached Christ and converted many.

κβ (14:7) περὶ τοῦ ἐν Λύστροις ἐκ γεννητῆς χωλοῦ ἰαθέντος διὰ τῶν ἀποστόλων, διόπερ εἶναί τε θεοὶ καὶ παρεῖναι ἔδοξαν τοῖς εγχωρίοις· ἔνθα δὴ καὶ μετέπειτα λιθάζεται ὁ Παῦλος παρὰ τῶν Ἰουδαίων τῶν ἀστυγειτόνων.

XXII (14:7) About the lame from birth who was healed by the apostles in Lystra. For that reason, the inhabitants considered them to be gods who had come to them. Then, afterwards, Paul was stoned by the Jews from the neighboring towns.

70

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

κγ (15:1) ὅτι οὐ δεῖ περιτέμνεσθαι τοὺς ἐξ ἐθνῶν πιστεύοντας, δόγματι καὶ κρίσει τῶν ἀποστόλων, ἐν ᾧ (15:13) ἐπιστολὴ αὐτῶν πρὸς τοὺς ἐξ ἐθνῶν, περὶ τῶν φυλακτέων, (15:36) ἀντίῤῥησις Παύλου πρὸς Βαρναβᾶν διὰ Μάρκον.

XXIII (15:1) That believers of the Gentiles do not have to be circumcised, according to the decision and the decree of the apostles. In this: (15:13) Their letter about observances to those of the Gentiles. (15:36) Paul’s discussion with Barnabas about of Mark.

κδ (15:40 or 16:1) περὶ τῆς κατηχήσεως Τιμοθέου, καὶ τῆς κατ᾽ ἀποκάλυψιν ἀφίξεως Παύλου εἰς Μακεδονίαν, ἐν ᾧ (16:14) περὶ πίστεως καὶ σωτηρίας τινὸς γυναικὸς Λυδίας, (16:16) περὶ ἰάσεως τῆς πνεῦμα Πύθωνος ἐχούσης παιδίσκης, δι᾽ ἣν τὸν Παῦλον καθεῖρξαν οἱ δεσπόται,

(16:38) ὅτι παρακληθέντες ἐξῆλθον τότε ἐκ τοῦ δεσμωτηρίου οἱ ἀπόστολοι.

XXIV (15:40 or 16:1) About the teaching of Timothy and the arrival of Paul to Macedonia, after a revelation. In this: (16:14) About the faith and salvation of a certain woman, Lydia. (16:16) About the healing of the woman servant who had a spirit of divination. On account of her, her masters had Paul put in prison. (16:25) About the earthquake that occured there and the miracle. And how the keeper of the prison believed and straightaway, in the same night, was baptized with his entire household. (16:38) That the apostles then left the prison, having been asked to do so.

κε (17:1) περὶ στάσεως γενομένης ἐν Θεσσαλονίκῃ τοῦ κηρύγματος ἕνεκεν, φυγῆς τε Παύλου εἰς Βεροίαν, κἀκεῖθεν εἰς Ἀθήνας.

XXV (17:1) About the uprising that took place in Thessalonica because of the preaching, and Paul’s escape to Beroea and from there to Athens.

κĴ (17:22) περὶ τῆς ἐν Ἀθήναις ἐπιβωμίου γραφῆς, φιλοσόφου τε κηρύγματος καὶ εὐσεβείας τοῦ Παύλου.

XXVI (17:22) About the inscription on the altar in Athens and the learned preaching and piety of Paul.

κζ (18:1) περὶ Ἀκύλα καὶ Πρισκίλλης, καὶ τῆς Κορινθίων ἀπειθείας, καὶ τῆς κατὰ πρόγνωσιν ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς εὐδοκίας τοῦ θεοῦ ἀποκαλυφθείσης τῷ Παύλῳ, ἐν ᾧ (18:8) περὶ Κρίσπου ἀρχισυναγώγου πιστεύσαντος σὺν ἑτέροις τισὶ καὶ βαπτισθέντος, (18:12) ὅτι στάσεως κινηθείσης ἐν Κορίνθῳ, ὁ Παῦλος ὑπανεχώρησεν, ἐλθών τε εἰς Ἔφεσον καὶ διαλεχθεὶς ἐξῆλθεν,

XXVII (18:1) About Aquila and Priscilla, the disobedience of the Corinthians, and God’s approval of them that was revealed to Paul in advance. In which: (18:8) About Crispus, the head of the synagogue, who believed and was baptized along with others. (18:12) That Paul withdrew when an uprising was provoked in Corinth. Having

(16:25) περὶ τοῦ συμβάντος ἐκεῖσε σεισμοῦ, καὶ θαύματος· καὶ ὅπως πιστεύσας ὁ εἱρκτοφύλαξ, ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ νυκτὶ ἐβαπτίσθη πανέστιος,




͋ϣϲрϩϟϧϟ
o
$IBQUFST

71

(18:24) περὶ Ἀπολλῶ ἀνδρὸς λογίου τε καὶ πιστοῦ.

reached Ephesus, he taught there, and then left. (18:24) About Apollo, a man both eloquent and faithful.

κη (19:1) περὶ βαπτίσματος, καὶ τῆς τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος δωρεᾶς δοθείσης διὰ προσευχῆς Παύλου τοῖς ἐν Ἐφέσῳ πιστεύσασι, καὶ περὶ ἰάσεως τοῦ λαοῦ, ἐν ᾧ (19:13) περὶ τῶν υἱῶν Σκευᾶ, ὅτιπερ οὐ δεῖ ἐγχειρεῖν ἀπίστοις, καὶ ἀναξίοις τῆς πίστεως γινομένοις καὶ περὶ ἐξομολογήσεως τῶν πιστευόντων, (19:23) περὶ τῆς ἐν Ἐφέσῳ κινηθείσης στάσεως ὑπὸ Δημητρίου τοῦ ἀργυροκόπου κατὰ τῶν ἀποστόλων.

XXVIII (19:1) About baptism and the gift of the Holy Spirit through prayer to the believers in Ephesus, and about healing of the people. In this: (19:13) About the sons of Sceva. And that one should not approach unbelievers and those who are unworthy of faith. And about the confession of the believers. (19:23) About the uproar against the apostles that was provoked in Ephesus by Demetrius the silversmith.

κθ (20:2) περίοδος Παύλου, ἐν ᾗ τὰ περὶ θανάτου, καὶ ἀνακλήσεως Εὐτύχου διὰ προσευχῆς ἐν Τρωάδι· παραινέσεις τε αὐτοῦ ποιμαντικαὶ πρὸς τοὺς ἐν Ἐφέσῳ πρεσβυτέρους, ἐν ᾧ (21:1) παράπλους Παύλου ἀπὸ Ἐφέσου ἄχρι Καισαρείας τῆς Παλαιστίνης.

XXIX (20:2) The travel of Paul. In this [is the story of] the death of Eutychus in Troas and his being called back through prayer. And his pastoral exhortations to the elders in Ephesus. In this: (21:1) About the passage of Paul from Ephesus to Caesarea in Palestine.

λ (21:10) Ἀγάβου προφητεία περὶ τῶν συμβησομένων τῷ Παύλῳ ἐν Ἰερουσαλήμ.

XXX (21:10) The prophecy of Agabus concerning what would happen to Paul in Jerusalem.

λα (21:20) παραίνεσις Ἰακώβου πρὸς Παῦλον περὶ τοῦ μὴ δοκεῖν κωλύειν Ἑβραίους περιτέμνεσθαι.

XXXI (21:20) The appeal of James to Paul that he should not appear as one who forbids circumcision among the Hebrews.

λβ (21:27) περὶ τῆς ἐν Ἰερουσαλὴμ κατὰ τοῦ Παύλου κινηθείσης ἀταξίας, ὅπως τε αὐτὸν ὁ χιλίαρχος τοῦ πλήθους ἐξαιρεῖται, ἐν ᾧ (22:1) Παύλου κατάστασις περὶ ἑαυτοῦ, καὶ τῆς εἰς ἀπόστολον αὐτοῦ κλήσεως, (22:12) περὶ ὧν ὁ Ἀνανίας εἶπεν πρὸς τὸν Παῦλον ἐν Δαμασκῷ, ὀπτασίας τε καὶ φωνῆς θεοῦ γενομένης ποτὲ πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ, (22:25) ὅτι μέλλων ἐπὶ τούτοις ὁ Παῦλος τύπτεσθαι, εἰπὼν ὅτι Ῥωμαῖός ἐστιν, ἀνείθη.

XXXII (21:27) About the uproar against Paul that was provoked in Jerusalem, and how the chief captain took him away from the crowd. In this: (22:1) Paul’s account about himself and his call to apostleship. (22:12) About what Ananias said to Paul in Damascus, the vision, and the voice of God that once came to him in the temple. (22:25) That when they were going to beat

72

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

Paul for this, they released him after he said he was a Roman. λγ (22:30) ὅσα Παῦλος καταβὰς εἰς τὸ συνέδριον ἔπαθε τε καὶ εἶπε, καὶ εὐθυβόλως ἔπραξε.

XXXIII (22:30) What Paul suffered and spoke about when he had gone down to the Sanhedrin, and what he achieved by his cunning.

λδ (23:12) περὶ ἐπιβουλῆς μελετωμένης ὑπὸ Ἰουδαίων κατὰ Παύλου, καὶ μηνύσεως αὐτῆς πρὸς Λυσίαν, ἐν ᾧ (23:22) ὅτι παρεπέμφθη ὁ Παῦλος τῷ ἡγεμόνι εἰς τὴν Καισαρείαν μετὰ στρατιωτῶν καὶ γραμμάτων.

XXXIV (23:12) About the treachery which the Jews planned against Paul, and its being revealed to Lysias. In this: (23:22) That Paul was sent to the governor in Caesarea, accompanied by soldiers with a letter.

λε (24:1) Τερτύλλου περὶ Παύλου κατηγορία, καὶ αὐτοῦ ἀπολογία ἐπὶ τοῦ ἡγεμόνος.

XXXV (24:1) The accusation of Tertullus against Paul, and his defense before the governor.

λĴ (24:27) περὶ τῆς Φήλικος διαδοχῆς, καὶ τῆς Φήστου προαγωγῆς, τῆς τε ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἀνακρίσεως Παύλου καὶ ἀφέσεως.

XXXVI (24:27) About Felix being succeeded by the promotion of Festus, and the examination of Paul before him, and his [Paul’s] dismissal.

λζ (25:13) Ἀγρίππα καὶ Βερνίκης παρουσία, καὶ πεῦσις τῶν κατὰ Παῦλον, ἐν ᾧ (26:1) ἀπολογία Παύλου ἐπ᾽ αὐτῶν, περὶ τῆς ἐν νόμῳ θρησκείας αὐτοῦ καὶ κλήσεως εἰς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, (26:31) (24?) ὡς οὐδὲν ἀδικεῖ Ἰουδαίους ὁ Παῦλος, Ἀγρίππας ἔφη τῷ Φήστῳ.

XXXVII (25:13) The arrival of Agrippa and Bernice, and their investigation of Paul’s case. In this: (26:1) Paul’s defense before them, about his observance of the Law and his call to the Gospel. (26:31) (24?) That Agrippa said to Festus that Paul had not harmed the Jews at all.

λη (27:1) πλοῦς Παύλου ἐπὶ Ῥώμην κινδύνων πλείστων τε καὶ μεγίστων ἔμπλεως, ἐν ᾧ (27:21 or 25) παραίνεσις Παύλου πρὸς τοὺς σὺν αὐτῷ περὶ ἐλπίδος σωτηρίας, (27:41) ναυάγιον Παύλου, ὅπως τε διεσώθησαν εἰς Μελίτην νῆσον, καὶ ὅσα ἐν αὐτῃ ὁ Παῦλος ἐθαυματούργησεν.

XXXVIII (27:1) The sea voyage of Paul to Rome, full of many and great dangers. In this: (27:21 or 25) Exhortation of Paul to those who were with him about hope for salvation. (27:41) The shipwreck of Paul. How they were saved on the island of Malta, and the miracles Paul worked there.

λθ (28:11) ὅπως ἀπὸ Μελίτης εἰς Ῥώμην κατήντησεν ὁ Παῦλος.

XXXIX (28:11) How Paul came from Malta to Rome.




73

νɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
o
"SHVNFOUB

μ (28:17) περὶ διαλέξεως Παύλου τῆς πρὸς τοὺς ἐν Ῥώμῃ Ἰουδαίους.

XL (28:17) About Paul’s discussion with the Jews in Rome.

Ὑποθέσεις

Argumenta

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Ῥωμαίους ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶
"o$

Argument of the Letter to the Romans

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Κορίνθου, μήπω μὲν ἑωρακὼς Ῥωμαίους, ἀκούων δὲ περὶ αὐτῶν καὶ ἐπιποθῶν αὐτοὺς ἰδεῖν.

He sends this letter from Corinth, while he has not yet seen the Romans, but has heard about them and longs to see them.

[Summary]

[Summary]

καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἀποδέχεται τὴν πίστιν αὐτῶν καταγγελλομένην ὁρῶν πανταχοῦ· ἔπειτα σημαίνει πολλάκις ἑαυτὸν προθέμενον ἐλθεῖν διὰ τὸν εἰς αὐτοὺς πόθον, καὶ τέως μὴ δεδυνῆσθαι. καὶ λοιπὸν διδασκαλικὴν τὴν ἐπιστολὴν ποιεῖται περὶ κλήσεως ἐθνῶν· καὶ ὅτι ἡ περιτομὴ ἕως καιροῦ ἦν, καὶ νῦν πέπαυται· καὶ ὅτι διὰ τοῦ Χριστοῦ λέλυται τὸ παράπτωμα τοῦ Ἀδὰμ, καὶ ἡ σκιὰ τοῦ νόμου παρῆλθε. τὴν μὲν οὖν κλῆσιν τῶν ἐθνῶν ἀκολούθως γεγενῆσθαι κατασκευάζει, οὕτως ἀποδεικνὺς πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις ἔμφυτον εἶναι τὸν νόμον, καὶ πάντας ἀδιδάκτῳ τε τῇ φύσει, καὶ ἀπ᾽ αὐτῆς τῆς κτίσεως δύνασθαι γινώσκειν τὸν θεόν. διὸ καὶ εἰκότως αἰτιᾶται πρῶτον Ἕλληνας, ὡς μὲν τοῦ θεοῦ φανερώσαντος αὐτοῖς ἐκ τῶν ποιημάτων τοῦ κόσμου τὴν περὶ ἑαυτοῦ γνῶσιν καὶ τῆς ἀϊδίου δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ, ἥτις ἐστὶν ὁ λόγος αὐτοῦ, ἐν ᾧ καὶ δι᾽ οὗ τὰ πάντα πεποίηκεν· αὐτοὺς δὲ μὴ ἐγνωκέναι μὲν ἐκ τῶν κτισμάτων εἶναι θεὸν τὸν τούτων δημιουργόν· τὰ δὲ ποιήματα θεοποιήσαντας, καὶ τῇ κτίσει μᾶλλον ἢ αὐτῷ λατρεύσαντας. αἰτιᾶται δὲ καὶ Ἰουδαίους, ὡς μὴ φυλάξαντας τὸν νόμον, ἀλλὰ καὶ μᾶλλον διὰ τῆς παραβα-

And first, he praises their faith, which he sees announced everywhere. Then he informs [them] that he often had planned to come because of his longing for them, but that he has not been able to come earlier. And now, he composes the letter as a didactic letter about the call to the Gentiles. And [he says] that circumcision lasted until a certain time, but now it has been abolished. And [he says] that the fall of Adam was atoned through Christ, and that the shadow of the Law passed away. He confirms that the call to the Gentiles has come according to this, showing that the Law is implanted in all men, and that everybody can know God through their untaught natural faculties and from creation itself. Therefore, he also reasonably makes accusations, first against the Greeks. Although God revealed to them through the created things of the cosmos knowledge of Himself and His eternal power, which is His word by whom and through whom He made everything, they have not known on the basis of the created things that God is their Maker, but they made the created things gods and worshipped the creation

74

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

σεως τοῦ νόμου τὸν θεὸν ἀτιμάσαντας· more than Him. And he also accuses the καὶ οὕτως ἀμφότερα τὰ μέγιστα Ἰουδαίους Jews for not keeping the Law, but disgracτε καὶ Ἕλληνας συγκλείει καὶ ἐλέγχει ἐπὶ ing God by transgressing it. And in this παρανομίᾳ, ἵνα δείξῃ, ὅτι ἴσοι γενόμενοι manner, with both these extremely serious οἱ πάντες, ἐπίσης οἱ πάντες, ὡς ὑπεύθυνοι, matters, he shuts up both Jews and Greeks, τοῦ λυτρουμένου δέονται· τῆς δὲ χάριτος accusing them for transgression of the καὶ λυτρώσεως ἐπίσης τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις Law, in order to show that when they all γενoμένης καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ ἔθνη, εἰκότως have become equal, they all equally need καὶ ἡ κλῆσις γέγονε τῶν ἐθνῶν· τῆς redemption as guilty. And as the grace and δὲ κλήσεως τῶν ἐθνῶν γενομένης, ἐξ redemption came equally to both Jews ἀνάγκης πέπαυται ἡ περιτομὴ καὶ ἡ ἐν and Gentiles, reasonably the call has also τῷ νόμῳ σκιά. ὁ γὰρ Ἀβρὰμ, φησὶν, οὐκ come to the Gentiles. And the circumciἐν περιτομῇ, ἀλλὰ πρὸ τῆς περιτομῆς sion and the shadow of the Law have come δικαιωθεὶς, μετωνομάσθη μὲν Ἀβραὰμ, ὅτι to an end because the call has come to all πατὴρ πολλῶν ἐθνῶν ἔμελλεν εἶναι κατὰ Gentiles. For Abram, he says, after being τὴν ἐν τῇ ἀκροβυστίᾳ πίστιν· ἔλαβεν δὲ justified not in circumcision, but before μετὰ τὸ δικαιωθῆναι καὶ τὴν περιτoμὴν circumcision, was called by the new name ἐν σαρκὶ, ἵνα σημεῖον ᾖ τοῖς κατὰ σάρκα of Abraham, because he should be a father γεννωμένοις ἐξ αὐτοῦ, παύσεσθαί ποτε of many nations according to the faith he τὴν περιτομὴν, ὅταν τὰ ἔθνη γένηται τέκνα had as uncircumcised. After he was justiτοῦ Ἀβραὰμ ἀρξάμενα πολιτεύεσθαι κατὰ fied, he received also the circumcision in τὴν πίστιν τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ, ἐν ᾗ ἐδικαιώθη, the flesh, so that it should be a sign to his ὅτε ἦν ἐν ἀκροβυστίᾳ· τούτων γὰρ χάριν descendants according to the flesh. Cirκαὶ μετωνομάσθη Ἀβραάμ. ἀνάγκη δὲ cumcision will once come to an end when ἐλθόντων τῶν σημαινομένων, παύεσθαι τὸ the Gentiles become children of Abraham σημαίνον. εἰ μὲν οὖν τὰ ἔθνη ἀναγκάζουσι and start to live according to the faith of περιτέμνεσθαι, παυέτωσαν καὶ τὸ ὄνομα Abraham, by which he was justified when τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ καὶ καλείσθω Ἀβράμ· εἰ δὲ he was uncircumcised. And because of Ἀβραὰμ παρὰ θεοῦ μετωνομάσθη, οὐ δεῖ these things, Abraham received his new περιτέμνεσθαι τὰ ἔθνη· ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲ αὐτοὺς name. And it is necessary that the sign ἔτι τοὺς κατὰ σάρκα Ἰουδαίους, ἵνα ᾖ τὸ comes to an end when what it signifies ὄνομα βέβαιον, καὶ πατὴρ πολλῶν ἐθνῶν becomes reality. If thus they compel the καλῆται. καὶ γὰρ οὐ χρείαν ἔχει λοιπόν τις Gentiles to be circumcised, let them also περιτέμνεσθαι, ἀρκούμενος τῇ πίστει τοῦ give up the name Abraham, and let him Ἀβραὰμ, οὐδὲ τῆς ἄλλης δὲ τῆς ἐν τῷ νόμῳ be called Abram! But if Abram received a σκιᾶς· οὐ γὰρ ἐκ τούτων, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ πίστεως new name from God, the Gentiles do not δικαιοῦταί τις, καθάπερ καὶ ὁ Ἀβραάμ. have to be circumcised, and not even they ταῦτα οὕτως κατασκευάσας, ἀποδείκνυσι who are Jews according to the flesh, so that πάλιν, ὅτι ἄλλως οὐκ ἂν γένοιτο λύτρωσις the name should stand firm and he should καὶ χάρις τῷ Ἰσραὴλ καὶ τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, εἰ be called the father of many nations. For μὴ λυθείη ἡ ἀρχαία ἁμαρτία τοῦ Αδὰμ, ἡ nobody needs circumcision from now on, εἰς πάντας γενομένη. δι᾽ ἄλλου δὲ ταύτην as it is sufficient with the faith of Abraham, μὴ δύνασθαι ἐξαλειφθῆναι, φησὶν, ἢ διὰ not some other faith that is of the shadow Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ, δι᾽ οὗ καὶ ἐξ ἀρχῆς κατάρα of the Law. For one is justified not from γέγονεν· οὐ γὰρ δυνατὸν ἦν ἄλλον λῦσαι these things, but from faith, as also was




νɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
o
"SHVNFOUB

75

τὸ παράπτωμα. εἶτα γράφει ὅτι ἄλλως τοῦτο οὐ μὴ γένηται, εἰ μὴ σῶμα φορέσῃ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ γένηται ἄνθρωπος, ἵνα τοῦτο προσενέγκας ὑπὲρ πάντων, τοὺς πάντας ἐλευθερώσῃ ἀπὸ τοῦ θανάτου· καὶ ὥσπερ δι᾽ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ἡ ἁμαρτία εἰς τὸν κόσμον εἰσῆλθεν, οὕτως καὶ δι᾽ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ἡ χάρις γένηται. καὶ λοιπὸν ὡς καλὸς οἰκονόμος τοὺς μὲν Ἰουδαίους παραμυθεῖται, ὅτι οὐ παραβάται γίνεσθε τοῦ νόμου, ἐὰν εἰς τὸν Χριστὸν πιστεύσητε· τοῖς δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν παρεγγυᾷ μὴ ἐπαίρεσθαι κατὰ τοῦ Ἰσραὴλ, ἀλλὰ γινώσκειν, ὅτι ὡς κλάδοι ἐπὶ τὴν ῥίζαν, οὕτως ἐπ᾽ ἐκείνους ἐνεκεντρίσθησαν. μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα παραινετικοὺς λόγους εἰς τὰ ἤθη διδάξας, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν.

Abraham. After he has elaborated on this, he again shows that redemption and grace to Israel and the Gentiles could not have come in any other way, if not the old sin of Adam was atoned, the one that came to all. Through no other could this be erased, he says, than through Christ Jesus, through whom also the curse came from the beginning. For it was not possible for another to atone the sin. Then he writes that this could not happen in any other way, than the Son of God possessing a body and becoming a man so that He, by offering it for all, could free everyone from death. And as by one man sin entered into the world, so also through one man grace shall come. And now, as a good house-steward, he comforts on the one hand the Jews: ‘you do not become transgressors of the Law if you believe in Christ.’ On the other hand, he commands those from the Gentiles not to boast against Israel, but to understand that as branches upon the root, they were grafted onto them. After that, having taught exhortative words in order to strengthen the morals, he ends the letter.

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρώτης ἐπιστολῆς ɀϮч϶
͋ϭϮϧϫϦцϭϱ϶
%o$

Argument of the First Letter to the Corinthians.

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Ἐφέσου τῆς He sends this letter from Ephesus in Ἀσίας, ἑωρακὼς αὐτοὺς ἤδη καὶ διδάξας, Asia, after having seen and taught them. ὑπομιμνήσκων δὲ ὅμως διὰ τῆς ἐπιστολῆς Still, he reminds them through this letter. ταύτης.

[Prophasis]

[Prophasis]

ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· Κορίνθιοι ἐκ φιλονεικίας συναγόμενoι, ἐπεσχίζοντο ταῖς γνώμαις, καὶ λοιπὸν ἦν ἐν αὐτοῖς σχίσματα, καὶ ὄντων σχισμάτων παρεβλέποντο τὸν λαβόντα τὴν μητρυιάν·

The occasion for the letter is this: In their love of strife, the Corinthians were opposed to each other, they differed in opinions, and there were now divisions among them. As there were divisions, they did not

76

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

ἄλλοι δὲ ἤθελον καταλιμπάνειν τὰς ἰδίας γυναῖκας προφάσει τῆς ἐγκρατείας· τινὲς δὲ καὶ ἐν εἰδωλείοις ἤσθιον, ὡς ἀδιαφόρων ὄντων τῶν εἰδωλοθύτων· ἄλλοι δὲ τοὺς μὲν ἀλάλους ἐξουθένουν, τοὺς δὲ λαλοῦντας γλώσσαις ἐθαύμαζον· καὶ τέλος, ἠπάτηντο καὶ εἰς τὸ περὶ τῆς ἀναστάσεως μυστήριον, λέγοντες μὴ ἐγείρεσθαι τὴν σάρκα ταύτην. τούτων πάντων ἐν Κορίνθῳ κινουμένων, γράφουσιν οἱ λαοὶ τῷ ἀποστόλῳ, καὶ λοιπὸν πρὸς πάντα ἀντιγράφει.

act against the man living with his stepmother. Others wished to leave their wives, apparently for the sake of continence. Others even used to eat in the temples of the idols, since they regarded the offerings as an indifferent matter. Others despised those who did not speak with tongues, but admired those who did. And finally, they were deceived also concerning the mystery of resurrection, saying that this body is not raised. When all this was set in motion at Corinth, the people wrote to the Apostle, and now he replies to everything.

[Summary]

[Summary]

καὶ πρῶτον μὲν μαρτυρεῖ αὐτοῖς ἐν And first, he bears witness to their pruφρονήσει καὶ γνώσει· οὐκ ἀποδέχεται dence and wisdom, but he does not praise δὲ αὐτοὺς ποιοῦντας τὰ σχίσματα· ἀλλὰ them for making schisms. And he also adκαὶ συμβουλεύει μὴ ἐν λόγῳ τὴν ἀρετὴν, vises them not to esteem virtue according ἀλλ᾽ ἐν ἔργῳ καὶ δυνάμει ἡγεῖσθαι. ἔπειτα to word, but according to deed and power. ἐπιτιμήσας τῷ τὴν μητρυιὰν λαβόντι, καὶ Now, having rebuked the man who was παραινέσας μὴ ἔχειν κρίματα πρὸς ἑαυτοὺς, living with his stepmother and exhorted λοιπὸν περὶ ὧν ἔγραψαν ἀποκρίνεται· περὶ them not to go to law against one another, μὲν τοῦ γάμου διδάσκων ἄῤῥηκτον εἶναι he replies to what they wrote. About marτὴν συζυγίαν, καὶ ἐν καιρῷ μόνῳ σχολάζειν riage, he teaches that the union is not to be διὰ τὴν εὐχήν· διὰ δὲ τὸ ἀγαπᾶν αὐτοὺς broken, and that abstinence should be for τὴν ἐγκράτειαν, γράφει περὶ παρθενίας, a certain time only, for the sake of prayer. ὅτι οὐ κατ᾽ ἀνάγκην, ἀλλὰ πειθοῖ τοῦτο Because they love chastity, he writes to γινέσθω. εἶτα περὶ τῶν εἰδωλοθύτων, ἵνα them on virginity, that it should be not by μὴ καταχρῶνται τῇ γνώσει, ἀλλὰ τῇ ἀγάπῃ force, but by conviction. Then he writes πολιτεύωνται. κωλύει οὖν τὰ ἐν εἰδωλείῳ about food offered to idols in order that συμπόσια, ἵνα μὴ σκανδαλίζωνται οἱ μικροί. they should not misuse their knowledge, εἶτα περὶ τῶν πνευματικῶν χαρισμάτων but be governed by love. He forbids thereγράφει, ἵνα μὴ διαφέρωνται ἐν τοῖς fore the feasts in the temples so that the χαρίσμασιν, μηδὲ προκρίνωσι τὸν ἔχοντα weak will not be offended. Then he writes χάρισμα τόδε τοῦ ἔχοντος τόδε· πάντα about spiritual gifts, that they may not conγὰρ τοῦ αὐτοῦ πνεύματος εἶναι λέγει. καὶ tend for them or prefer someone who has a λοιπὸν περὶ ἀναστάσεως διδάσκει, ὅτι particular gift to someone who has another. ἡ σὰρξ ἐγείρεται, ἀποθνήσκουσα μὲν For everything comes from the same Spirit, φθαρτὴ, ἐγειρομένη δὲ ἄφθαρτος κατὰ τὴν he says. And now he teaches about resurχάριν τοῦ Χριστοῦ· τὴν δὲ ἀνάστασιν ἀπὸ rection, that the body is raised, corruptible τοῦ ἐγηγέρθαι τὸν Χριστὸν συνίστησιν. when it dies but incorruptible when it rises καὶ τέλος παραινετικοὺς λόγους εἰς τὰ through the grace of Christ. But resurrecἤθη γράφει, καὶ περὶ λογίας, τῆς εἰς τοὺς tion he derives from the raising of Christ.




νɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
o
"SHVNFOUB

77

ἁγίους, παραγγέλλει· καὶ οὕτως τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν.

And in the end he writes exhortative words in order to strengthen the morals, and he gives instructions about the collection for the saints. And thus he ends the letter.

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς δευτέρας ἐπιστολῆς ɀϮч϶
͋ϭϮϧϫϦцϭϱ϶
$o#

Argument of the the Second Letter to the Corinthians

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Μακεδονιας·

He sends this one from Macedonia.

[Prophasis]

[Prophasis]

ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· The occasion for the letter is this: The Corδεξάμενοι Κορίνθιοι τὴν προτέραν inthians were distressed after they had reἐπιστολὴν κατενύγησαν ἐπὶ τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ τοῦ ceived the previous letter, because of the sin λαβόντος τὴν μητρυιὰν, καὶ ἐλυπήθησαν of him who had lived with his stepmother, δὲ, ὡς παριδόντες τὸ τοιοῦτον ἁμάρτημα. and they were grieved because they had εἶτα ὑφηρπάζοντο παρά τινων, καὶ τὰς overlooked such an error. Then, they were προφάσεις τῶν σχισμάτων ποιούντων, also carried away by those who had caused ὥστε παρακαθέζεσθαι τῷ γράμματι τοῦ the divisions, to sit down beside the letter νόμου, καὶ ἀδιάφορον ἡγεῖσθαι τὴν παρὰ of the Law, consider the grace from Christ τοῦ Χριστοῦ χάριν, καὶ μᾶλλον προσέχειν unimportant, and rather attend people τοῖς ἐν προσώπῳ καυχωμένοις· ἦσαν δὲ who boast of their appearance. There were καὶ περὶ τῆς λογίας τῆς εἰς τοὺς ἁγίους also some who were concerned about the φροντίζοντες καλῶς. πρὸς ταῦτα οὖν collection to the saints. To these things, the ἀντιγράφει ὁ ἀπόστολος. Apostle answers in writing.

[Summary]

[Summary]

καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἀποδέχεται τοὺς And first, he praises them for expelling the ἐκβαλόντας τὸν παρανομήσαντα. ἔπειτα transgressor. Then he beseeches them to ἀξιώσασιν αὐτοῖς καθικετεύει, καὶ deem him worthy, and he orders them to μετανοήσαντα ἐκεῖνον κελεύει δεχθῆναι. ἐν receive him when he has repented. In this αὐτῇ δὲ διδάσκει περὶ τοῦ νόμου διαιρῶν τὸ letter he teaches them about the Law by γράμμα, καὶ δείκνυσιν, ὅτι οὐ δεῖ λαμβάνειν interpreting the letter. And he shows that τὰ γράμματα μόνον τοῦ νόμου, ἀλλὰ ἐν one should not only understand the letters αὐτῷ τῷ γράμματι τὴν διάνοιαν ἐρευνᾶν· of the Law, but also search after the meanοὐ γὰρ μόνον ῥῆμά ἐστιν ὁ νόμος, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν ing by use of the letter. For the Law is not τοῖς ῥητοῖς ἐστι καὶ ὁ νοῦς τοῦ πνεύματος. only words, but in the words is the purpose ἔπειτα ὅτι τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐλθόντος καινὴ of the Spirit. Then, [he says] that because κτίσις γέγονε, καὶ οὐ δεῖ κατὰ τὸ παλαιὸν Christ has come, there is a new creation, ζῇν, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς ἐν καινῇ κτίσει ἐν πᾶσιν and one should not live after the old order,

78

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

ἀνανεοῦσθαι, καὶ ἀργὴν εἶναι λοιπὸν τὴν περιτομήν. ἀποδέχεται δὲ αὐτοὺς καὶ περὶ τῆς διακονίας, καὶ προτρέπεται μᾶλλον αὐτὴν πλεονάζειν. αἰτιώμενος δὲ τοὺς ἐν πρωσώπῳ καυχωμένους καταλέγει πάντα, ἅπερ πέπονθε διὰ τὸν κύριον· καὶ τὰς ὀπτασίας διηγεῖται ἅσπερ ἑώρακεν εἴς τε τὸν παράδεισον, καὶ εἰς τὸν τρίτον οὐρανὸν ἁρπαγείς. εἶτα παραγγείλας μὴ ἁμαρτάνειν· ἀλλὰ μετανοεῖν τοὺς ἁμαρτάνoντας, ἐν εὐχαριστίᾳ τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν.

but be renewed in everything as in a new creation, and that circumcision from now on is useless. He praises them also for the collection and exhorts them to increase it even more. Accusing those who boast of their appearance, he recounts everything he has suffered for the sake of the Lord. He also describes the visions he saw, when he was caught up to Paradise and the third heaven. Then, having ordered that they should not sin and that sinners should repent, he ends the letter with thanksgiving.

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Γαλάτας ἐπιστολῆς (760BD)

Argument of the Letter to the Galatians

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Ῥώμης ἑωρακὼς αὐτοὺς ἤδη καὶ διδάξας·

He sends this letter from Rome, after he has seen and taught them.

[Prophasis]

[Prophasis]

ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· The occasion for the letter is this: The Galaδιδαχθέντες καλῶς οἱ Γαλάται παρὰ τοῦ tians were well taught by the Apostle, and ἀποστόλου, καὶ πιστεύσαντες γνησίως they truly believed in Christ. After the εἰς τὸν Χριστὸν, ἀποδημήσαντος τοῦ Apostle had left, they were led by some ἀποστόλου, ὑφηρπάσθησαν παρά τινων people to be circumcised. When the Aposὥστε περιτέμνεσθαι. ταῦτα τοίνυν μαθὼν tle now learns this, he writes to them. ὁ ἀπόστολος γράφει πρὸς αὐτούς.

[Summary]

[Summary]

καὶ πρῶτον μὲν μαρτυρεῖ αὐτοῖς, περὶ And first, he bears witness to their faith ἧς εἶχον πίστεως, καὶ γνησίας ἐν Χριστῷ and their true conviction of Christ. But he διαθέσεως· μέμφεται δὲ ὡς ἀνοήτως rebukes them for acting unwisely and for πράξαντας, καὶ μεταβαλλομένους αὐτούς. changing their minds. Then he interprets ἔπειτα διαλαμβάνει περὶ τοῦ νόμου, the Law and the faith of Abraham, and καὶ τῆς κατὰ τὸν Ἀβραὰμ πίστεως, καὶ he shows on the basis of the Law and the ἀποδείκνυσιν ἔκ τε τοῦ νόμου καὶ τῶν wives of Abraham, interpreting them alleγυναικῶν τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ, ἀλληγορήσας gorically, that the shadow and the circumαὐτὰς, μέχρι καιροῦ δεδόσθαι τὴν σκιὰν cision were given until a certain time, and καὶ τὴν περιτομὴν, καὶ ἀργεῖν αὐτὰ λοιπὸν that they since the coming of Christ are τῇ τοῦ Χριστοῦ παρουσίᾳ. καὶ οὕτως useless. And having shown this, he orders




νɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
o
"SHVNFOUB

79

ἀποδείξας, παραγγέλλει λοιπὸν αὐτοῖς, μηκέτι προσέχειν τοῖς ἀπαντήσασιν, ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον ἔχεσθαι τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ πίστεως, καὶ γιγνώσκειν, ὅτι ἡ ἐν Χριστῷ χάρις καταργεῖ τὴν κατὰ σάρκα περιτομήν. καὶ οὕτως πάλιν εἰς τὰ ἤθη παραινέσας, καὶ διδάξας, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν.

them from now on no longer to listen to those who have come to them, but rather to have faith in Christ, and to know that the grace in Christ makes circumcision according to the flesh useless. Having again exhorted and taught in order to strenghten the morals, he thus ends the letter.

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς ͽϲϣϯцϭϱ϶
ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶
$o"

Argument of the Letter to the Ephesians

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Ῥώμης, οὔπω μὲν ἑωρακὼς αὐτοὺς, ἀκούσας δὲ περὶ αὐτῶν.

He sends this letter from Rome, while he has not yet seen them, but heard about them.

[Prophasis]

[Prophasis]

ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· The occasion for the letter is this: The Ἐφέσιοι πιστεύσαντες εἰς τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ephesians had come to believe in our Lord Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν, γνησίαν ἔσχον εἰς αὐτὸν Jesus Christ. They truly had faith in Him τὴν πίστιν καὶ εἰς πάντας τοὺς ἁγίους τὴν and love for all the saints, and they wantἀγάπην, καὶ ἠβούλοντο παρὰ τοῦ Παύλου ed to be strengthened by Paul. When the βεβαιωθῆναι. μαθὼν τοίνυν ὁ ἀπόστολος, Apostle now learns this, he writes this letter γράφει πρὸς αὐτοὺς ταύτην τὴν ἐπιστολὴν to them as a catechetical letter. ὥσπερ κατηχητικήν.

[Summary]

[Summary]

καὶ πρῶτον μὲν δείκνυσι μὴ νεώτερον εἶναι And first, he demonstrates that the mystery τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς μυστήριον· ἀλλ᾽ ἐξ ἀρχῆς [that came] to us is not new, but existed καὶ πρὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου εἶναι ταύτην from the beginning. And before the founεὐδοκίαν τοῦ θεοῦ, ὥστε τὸν Χριστὸν ὑπὲρ dation of the world, it was the decision of ἡμῶν παθεῖν καὶ ἡμᾶς σωθῆναι. ἔπειτα God that Christ should suffer for us, and περὶ κλήσεως τῶν ἐθνῶν διαλέγεται, ἵνα that we should be saved. Then he discusses δείξῃ ἀξίως αὐτοὺς πεπιστευκέναι. καὶ the call to the Gentiles to show that they are ἀποδείκνυσιν, ὅτι ἡ κλῆσις ἡμῶν γέγονεν worthy of becoming believers. And he deοὐ δι᾽ ἀνθρώπου, ἀλλὰ διὰ Χριστοῦ, ὅς clares that our call has not come through a ἐστιν υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ· ἵνα καὶ ἐκ τούτου man, but through Christ, who is the Son of μάθωσιν, ὅτι οὐκ ἀνθρωπολάτραι God, so that they also from this may learn γεγόνασιν, πιστεύσαντες τῷ Χριστῷ, that they as believers in Christ do not pay ἀλλὰ ἀληθινοὶ θεοσεβεῖς. σημαίνει δὲ καὶ homage to a man, but that they truly worἑαυτὸν διὰ τοῦτο ἀπεστάλθαι, κηρύσσειν ship God. He informs them that for this

80

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, καὶ ὅτι καὶ περὶ αὐτῶν ἐφρόντιζεν. ἔπειτα παραινετικοὺς λόγους ἀνδράσι καὶ γυναιξὶ, πατράσι καὶ τέκνοις, κυρίοις καὶ δούλοις τίθησιν ἐν τῇ ἐπιστολῇ, καὶ καθόλου πάντας παρασκευάζει κατὰ τοῦ διαβόλου καὶ τῶν δαιμόνων αὐτοῦ, λέγων πρὸς ἐκείνους ἡμῖν εἶναι τὴν πάλην· καὶ ὥσπερ ἀγαθὸς ἀλείπτης ἀλείψας τοῖς λόγοις πάντας κατὰ τῆς διαβολικῆς ἐνεργείας, οὕτως τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν.

reason, he has also been sent to preach the gospel, and that he was concerned about them as well. Then, he places exhortative words in the letter, to husbands and wives, to fathers and children, and to masters and slaves. And in general, he provides everything against the devil and his demons, stating that the fight is against them. And thus he ends the letter, as a good anointer, having anointed everybody with his words against the devilish power.

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Φιλιππησίους ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶
%o"

Argument of the Letter to the Philippians

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Ῥώμης ἑωρακὼς αὐτοὺς ἅμα καὶ διδάξας·

He sends this from Rome, after he has seen and also taught them.

[Prophasis]

[Prophasis]

ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· πεμψάντων Φιλιππησίων διακονίαν τῷ Παύλῳ, καί τινων περιερχομένων καὶ διαφθειρόντων τὰς ἀκοὰς τῶν ἀκεραίων, προφάσει τῆς σκιᾶς τοῦ νόμου καὶ τῆς περιτομῆς, καὶ λεγόντων χωρὶς ταύτης μὴ δύνασθαι δικαιωθῆναι· μαθὼν ὁ ἀπόστολος γράφει Φιλιππησίοις.

The occasion for the letter is this: When the Philippians had sent a collection to Paul, some people were deceiving them and corrupting the ears of the pure because of the shadow of the Law and circumcision, saying that they could not be justified without them. When the Apostle learns this, he writes to the Philippians.

[Summary]

[Summary]

καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἀποδέχεται αὐτῶν τὴν And first, he praises their faith and anπίστιν, καὶ σημαίνει μνημονεύειν αὐτῶν. nounces that he remembers them. Then ἔπειτα διηγεῖται, ὡς ἀπελογήσατο ἐν he describes how he defended himself in Ῥώμῃ, καὶ ὅτι τινὲς αὐτῷ βαρεῖς γεγόνασιν Rome and that some people became burἐν τοῖς δεσμοῖς, φθόνoν αὐτῷ κινοῦντες. densome in prison, provoking envy of him. ἔπειτα αὐτοὺς προτρέπεται ἀλλήλους Then he exhorts them to love one another, ἀγαπᾶν, ἐξηγούμενος τὴν τοῦ σωτῆρος explaining the Savior’s love for mankind, φιλανθρωπίαν, ὅτι θεὸς ὢν ἄνθρωπος because, being God, He became a man for γέγονεν δι᾽ ἡμᾶς. εἶτα περὶ τῆς περιτομῆς, our sake. Then, interpreting circumcision καὶ τοῦ παλαιοῦ νόμου διαλαβὼν, and the old Law, he shows that circumciἀποδείκνυσιν ἀργὴν γεγενῆσθαι λοιπὸν sion from now on is useless, using an ex-




νɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
o
"SHVNFOUB

81

τὴν περιτομὴν, λαμβάνων ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ παράδειγμα, καὶ λέγων· ὅτι ταῦτα πάντα ἥγημαι διὰ τὸν Χριστὸν ζημίαν. διὸ καὶ τοὺς μὲν διδάσκοντας ἔτι περιτομὴν καὶ θέλοντας αὐτοὺς ἀπατῆσαι, μεμψάμενος, καὶ εἰπὼν, ἐχθροὺς αὐτοὺς εἶναι τοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἀποδέχεται Φιλιππησίους διὰ τὴν πρὸς αὐτὸν τῆς κοινωνίας δόσιν, καὶ προτρεψάμενος πάλιν εἰς τὰ ἤθη αὐτοὺς, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς

ample from his own life, saying: ‘All these things I counted as a loss for the sake of Christ.’ Therefore, having rebuked those who still teach about circumcision and want to deceive them, saying that they are enemies of Christ, he praises the Philippians for their gift of fellowship. And having again exhorted them in order to strengthen the morals, he thus ends the letter.

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Κολοσσαεῖς ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶
͑ϟъϩϭϱ
$o#

Argument of the Letter of Paul to the Colossians

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Ῥώμης, οὐχ ἑωρακὼς μὲν αὐτοὺς, ἀκούσας δὲ περὶ αὐτῶν.

He sends this letter from Rome, while he has not seen them, but heard about them.

[Prophasis]

[Prophasis]

ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· τοὺς Κολοσσαεῖς ἠβούλοντό τινες ἠπατῆσαι σοφίσμασιν ἑλληνικοῖς κατὰ τῆς εἰς Χριστὸν πίστεως, καὶ περὶ τῶν ἐν νόμῳ βρωμάτων καὶ περιτομῆς· ταῦτα τοίνυν μαθὼν ὁ ἀπόστολος, γράφει τὴν ἐπιστολὴν ὥσπερ κατηχητικὴν αὐτοῖς ταύτην.

The occasion for the letter is this: Some people wanted to deceive the Colossians with Greek sophisms, directed against the faith in Christ, concerning food permitted in the Law and circumcision. When the Apostle now learns this, he writes this letter to them as a catechetical letter.

[Summary]

[Summary]

καὶ πρῶτον μὲν εὐχαριστῶν τῷ θεῷ, And first, as he gives thanks to God, he σημαίνει ἀπὸ τοῦ σκότους αὐτοὺς announces that they have been translated μεταβεβηκέναι εἰς τὸ φῶς τῆς ἀληθείας, from darkness to the light of truth, and καὶ ὅτι ὁ Χριστὸς, εἰς ὃν ἐπίστευσαν, εἰκών that Christ, in whom they believe, is the ἐστι τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ λόγος, δι᾽ οὗ τὰ πάντα image of God and His Word, through ἐγένετο· καὶ ὅτι ἔπρεπεν αὐτὸν δημιουργὸν whom everything came into being. And ὄντα, γενέσθαι αὐτὸν καὶ πρωτότοκον τῆς that it is fitting that He, being the Creator, κτίσεως, καὶ πρωτότοκον ἐκ τῶν νεκρων, should become the first-born of the creaἵνα τὰ ἀμφότερα συνάψῃ καὶ ζωοποιήσῃ tures and the first-born from the dead, so τὰ πάντα. προέτρεπεν δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐμμένειν that He should unite both and give life to τῇ πίστει, σημαίνων, ὅτι αὐτὸς ὁ Παῦλος everything. He exhorts them to remain in

82

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

διάκονός ἐστι τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, ἐν ᾧ κατηχήθησαν. εἶτα καὶ περὶ τοῦ νόμου, καὶ τῶν ἐν αὐτῷ βρωμάτων, καὶ περὶ ἡμερῶν, καὶ ἐνιαυτῶν ἐξηγεῖται, καὶ ἀποδείκνυσιν ἠργηκέναι λοιπὸν τὰ παλαιὰ καὶ τὴν περιτομὴν· συμβουλεύει τε αὐτοῖς μὴ πλανᾶσθαι ἀπὸ τῶν σοφιζομένων, καὶ πλανᾶν αὐτοὺς θελόντων. καὶ λοιπὸν παραινέσας, καὶ ὧδε γονεῦσι καὶ τέκνοις, ἀνδράσι καὶ γυναιξὶ, δούλοις καὶ κυρίοις, καὶ τὰ ἄλλα τὰ πρὸς τὰ ἤθη συμβουλεύσας, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. παραγγέλλει μέντοι αὐτοῖς, ἵνα, ὅταν ἀναγνωσθῇ παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς ἡ ἐπιστολὴ, ποιήσωσι καὶ ἐν τῇ Λαοδικέων ἐκκλησίᾳ αὐτὴν ἀναγνωσθῆναι, καὶ τὴν ἐκ Λαοδικείας καὶ αὐτοὺς ἀναγνῶναι.

the faith, announcing that he, Paul, is a servant of the Gospel, in which they were instructed. Then he teaches about the Law, and the foods it permits, and about days and years, and he shows that the old things and the circumcision from now on are useless. And he advises them not to be deceived by the impostors and those who wish to lead them astray. He exhorts and gives advice to parents and children, husbands and wives, and slaves and masters, and other things in order to strengthen UIF
NPSBMT
ćVT
IF
FOET
UIF
MFUUFS
:FU
IF
orders them that when this letter has been read to them, they shall arrange that it also be read in the church of Laodicea, and that they shall read the letter from Laodicea.

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Θεσσαλονικεῖς πρώτης ἐπιστολῆς Παύλου (769AC)

Argument of the First Letter of Paul to the Thessalonians

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Ἀθηνῶν ἑωρακὼς He sends this from Athens, after he has πρότερον αὐτοὺς, καὶ διατρίψας παρ᾽ seen them earlier and spent time with αὐτοῖς· them.

[Prophasis]

[Prophasis]

ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· ὁ The occasion for the letter is this: The ἀπόστολος πολλὰς θλίψεις παθὼν ἐν Apostle had suffered much affliction in Βεροίᾳ καὶ ἐν Φιλίπποις τῆς Μακεδονίας Beroea, Philippi of Macedonia, and in καὶ ἐν Κορίνθῳ, γινώσκων τε, ὅσα πέπονθεν Corinth, and knowing how much he sufκαὶ ἐν Θεσσαλονίκῃ, φοβούμενος μὴ fered in Thessalonice, he fears that the ἀκούσαντες Θεσσαλονικεῖς, ἃ πέπονθεν ἐν Thessalonians, when they hear about his ταῖς προειρημέναις πόλεσιν, πειρασθῶσιν sufferings in the cities mentioned above, ὑπὸ τοῦ πειράζοντος καὶ σκανδαλισθῶσιν· will be tempted by the tempter and take ofμαθὼν δὲ ὅτι καὶ ἐπὶ τοῖς ἀποθνήσκουσι fence. And when he gets to know that they κατώδυνοι ἐγίνοντο, ἀποστέλλει Τιμόθεον are mourning the dead, he sends Timothy πρὸς αὐτοὺς μετὰ τῆς ἐπιστολῆς ταύτης. to them with this letter.




νɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
o
"SHVNFOUB

[Summary]

83

[Summary]

καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἐπιστηρίζει αὐτοὺς ἐν τῇ And first, he strengthens them in their πίστει, ὥστε μὴ σαλεύεσθαι διὰ τὰς θλίψεις, faith so that they should not be shaken καὶ μηδὲν ξένον αὐτοὺς πεπονθέναι because of persecutions, and he says that ὑπὸ τῶν Ἰουδαίων, τῶν καὶ τὸν κύριον it is not strange that they have suffered by ἀποκτεινάντων· Χριστιανῶν γὰρ ἴδιον the hands of the Jews, who also killed the τὸ θλίβεσθαι ἐν τῷ βίῳ τούτῳ, ἔλεγεν. Lord. For suffering persecution in this life πολλὰ δὲ παραινέσας αὐτοὺς, οὕτως, ὡς is the hallmark of the Christians, he said. παρέλαβον ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ, ἀναστρέφεσθαι, After he has exhorted them in many things γράφει περὶ τῶν τελευτώντων, to behave as he instructed them, he writes παραμυθοῦμενος αὐτοὺς καὶ διδάσκων μὴ about the dead, comforting them and βαρέως φέρειν· οὐ γὰρ εἶναι τὸν θάνατον teaching them not to feel grief, as death ἀπώλειαν, ἀλλ᾽ ὁδὸν ἀναστάσεως. ἔπειτα is not destruction, but the way to resurκαὶ περὶ τῶν χρόνων αὐτοὺς διδάσκει, rection. Then he teaches them about the ἵνα ἄδηλον τὴν ἡμέραν γινώσκοντες, ἀεὶ times, that they should understand that ἕτοιμοι γίνωνται, καὶ μηδενὶ προσέχωσιν the day is unknown, and that they should ἐπαγγελλομένῳ περὶ αὐτῆς· ἔσεσθαι γὰρ, always be prepared and never listen to φησὶ, τὴν παρουσίαν οὕτως, ὥστε τοὺς anyone making promises about it. For the περιλειπομένους καὶ εὑρισκομένους ἐν τῇ coming, he says, will happen so that those ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ, μὴ φθάνειν τοὺς ἐκ νεκρῶν who are alive and remain that day will not ἐγειρομένους· ἅμα γὰρ γίνεσθαι τὴν come before those who are raised from the πάντων ἀλλαγὴν διδάσκει. πρὸς τούτοις dead, because the transformation of all ocπροτρέπων αὐτοὺς βελτιοῦσθαι ἐν τοῖς curs at the same time. In addition to this, ἤθεσι προτρέπει αὐτοὺς καὶ ἀεὶ χαίρειν τῇ he exhorts them to improve morally and ἐλπίδι καὶ προσεύχεσθαι καὶ εὐχαριστεῖν to always rejoice in hope, to pray and give αὐτοὺς ἀεὶ τῷ κυρίῳ· ἐνορκίζων αὐτοὺς thanks to the Lord. He gives orders that ἀναγνῶναι τὴν ἐπιστολὴν ταύτην πᾶσι τοῖς this letter should be read to all the brethἀδελφοῖς· καὶ οὕτως τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. ren. And thus he ends the letter.

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Θεσσαλονικεῖς δευτέρας ἐπιστολῆς (772BD)

Argument of the Second Letter to the Thessalonians

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Ῥώμης·

This he sends from Rome.

[Prophasis]

[Prophasis]

ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· τινὲς The occasion for the letter is this: Some idle ἀπὸ Θεσσαλoνίκης ἀργοὶ καὶ ἄτακτοι, and unruly impostors from Thessalonice περιερχόμενοι, τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς ὑφήρπαζον, were seducing them, saying that the comὡς ἤδη τῆς παρουσίας τοῦ κυρίου ing was already imminent. They tried to ἐνστάσης. ἠπάτων δὲ τοὺς ἀκούοντας, deceive the listeners, telling them that the

84

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

ὡς τοῦ ἀποστόλου τοῦτο δηλοῦντος καὶ Apostle had made this known, and that ὑπὸ πνεύματος ἀκούσαντες. ταῦτα τοίνυν they had heard it from the Spirit. When μαθὼν ὁ ἀπόστολος γράφει τὴν ἐπιστολήν. now the Apostle learns this, he writes the letter.

[Summary]

[Summary]

καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἀποδέχεται τὴν πίστιν And first, he praises their faith for progressαὐτῶν αὐξανουσαν, καὶ ὅτι ἐν αὐτoῖς ing and says that he glories in them, since ἐκαυχᾶτο, τὰς θλίψεις γενναίως they in a worthy manner endure persecuὑποφέρουσιν διὰ τὸν Χριστόν· tions for Christ’s sake. And he comforts παραμυθεῖται δὲ αὐτοὺς, ὡς ἑπομένης them, saying that punishment from God ἐκδικίας παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ κατὰ τῶν αὐτοὺς will follow upon those who harm them. ἀδικούντων. ἔπειτα περὶ τῆς παρουσίας Then he teaches about the coming of the τοῦ σωτῆρος διδάσκει μηδενὶ αὐτοὺς Savior, that they should not believe anyπείθεσθαι, μηδὲ θροεῖσθαι αὐτοὺς, μήτε one, nor be frightened, neither by a spirit, διὰ πνεύματος, μήτε ὡς αὐτοῦ γράψαντος, nor by a writing said to come from him; μηδὲ ὅλως νομίζειν ἤδη παρεῖναι αὐτήν· they should not at all believe it is already μὴ γὰρ πρότερον ἔσεσθαι αὐτὴν, ἐὰν μὴ ἡ at hand. For it will not happen unless the ἀποστασία πρῶτον ἐλθῃ, καὶ μετὰ ταύτην defection has come first. And after that, he ὁ ἀντίχριστος ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας, οὗ τὴν announces, Antichrist will come, the Son παρουσίαν ἐν σημείοις καὶ τέρασι ψεύδους, of perdition, whose coming is with signs κατ᾽ ἐνέργειαν2 τοῦ Σατανᾶ ἔσεσθαι and false wonders, wrought by the power σημαίνει. εἶτα παραινέσας αὐτοῖς στήκειν of Satan. Then, having exhorted them to γενναίως, καὶ κρατεῖν τὰς παραδόσεις ἃς stand in a worthy manner and to keep the ἐδιδάχθησαν παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ, παραγγέλλει traditions, which they were taught from μηδεμίαν κοινωνίαν ἔχειν μετὰ τῶν him, he orders them not to have any felἀτάκτων, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀποβάλλειν αὐτούς· lowship with the unruly, and even to expel εἶναι γὰρ καὶ περιέργους καὶ πλάνους them. For he has shown that such people ἐδήλωσε τοὺς τοιούτους· καὶ καθόλου are meddlesome and seductive. And in δὲ παρήγγειλεν τὸν μὴ ὑπακούοντα τοῖς general, he ordered that he who did not λόγοις αὐτοῦ, τοῦτον ἀποσυνάγωγον obey his words should be expelled from γίνεσθαι. καὶ λοιπὸν ἐπευξάμενος αὐτοῖς the community. And now, having prayed εἰρήνην, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολὴν, τὸν for peace on their behalf, he ends the letter, ἀσπασμὸν τῇ ἰδίᾳ χειρὶ γράψας, ὅπερ having written the greeting with his own σημεῖον εἶναι πάσης ἐπιστολῆς δεδήλωκεν. hand, which he declares to be a sign in every letter.

2

Zacagni. καὶ ἐνέργειαν, von Soden.




νɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
o
"SHVNFOUB

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Ἑβραίους ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶
͑ϟъϩϭϱ
$o"

85

Argument of the Letter of Paul to the Hebrews

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Ἰταλίας·

He sends this from Italy.

[Prophasis]

[Prophasis]

ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· ἐπειδὴ οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι ἐνίσταντο τῷ νόμῳ, καὶ ταῖς σκιαῖς, διὰ τοῦτο ὁ ἀπόστολος Παῦλος διδάσκαλος ἐθνῶν γενόμενος, καὶ εἰς τὰ ἔθνη ἀποσταλεὶς, κηρύττει τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, γράψας τε πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσι, γράφει λοιπὸν καὶ πᾶσι τοῖς ἐκ περιτομῆς πιστεύσασιν Ἑβραίοις ἀποδεικτικὴν ταύτην τὴν ἐπιστολὴν περὶ τῆς τοῦ Χριστοῦ παρουσίας, καὶ τοῦ πέπαυσθαι τὴν σκιὰν τοῦ νόμου.

The occasion for the letter is this: Since the Jews adhered to the Law and the shadows, for this reason Paul the Apostle proclaimed the Gospel, having become the teacher of the Gentiles and having been sent to the Gentiles. Having written to all the Gentiles, now he writes also to all Hebrew believers of the circumcision this letter as a demonstrative letter about the coming of Christ and the abolishment of the shadow of the Law.

[Summary]

[Summary]

καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἀποδείκνυσι τοὺς προφήτας διὰ τοῦτο ἀπεστάλθαι, ἵνα περὶ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἀπαγγείλωσιν· καὶ μετ᾽ αὐτοὺς αὐτὸς ἔλθῃ. δούλους τε εἶναι τοὺς προφήτας καὶ μηνυτὰς τῆς αὐτοῦ παρουσίας· αὐτὸν δὲ τὸν Χριστὸν υἱὸν εἶναι τοῦ θεοῦ, δι᾽ οὗ τὰ πάντα γέγονε, καὶ ὅτι τοῦτον τὸν υἱὸν ἔδει ἄνθρωπον γενέσθαι, ἵνα διὰ τῆς τοῦ σώματος αὐτοῦ θυσίας καταργήσῃ τὸν θάνατον. οὐ γὰρ δι᾽ αἵματος μόσχου ἢ τράγου, ἀλλὰ δι᾽ αἵματος Xριστοῦ ἔσεσθαι τὴν σωτηρίαν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις. ἀποδείκνυσι δὲ, ὅτι ὁ νόμος οὐδένα ἐτελείωσεν, ἀλλὰ σκιὰν εἶχεν τῶν μελλόντων ἀγαθῶν· καὶ οὐ κατέπαυσεν ὁ λαὸς, ἀλλὰ κοινὴ πᾶσιν ἡμῖν ἀπολείπεται ἡ ἡμέρα τῆς καταπαύσεως. πάλιν δὲ ἀποδείκνυσιν, ὅτι ἡ ἀρχιερατικὴ λειτουργία μετετέθη ἀπὸ Ἀαρὼν εἰς τὸν Χριστὸν, οὗ τύπος ἦν ὁ Μελχισέδεκ, οὐκ ὢν ἐκ τοῦ Λευΐ. πίστει τε δεδικαιῶσθαι τοὺς

And first, he shows that the prophets were sent to proclaim the Savior, and after them He would come Himself. The prophets were servants and harbingers of His coming. And he shows that Christ himself is the Son of God, through whom everything came into being, and that He, the Son, had to become a man so that He could destroy death through the sacrifice of his own body, because salvation for men will not come through the blood of a calf or a goat, but through the blood of Christ. And he shows that the Law has not made anyone perfect, but contained a shadow of the good things to come. The Jewish people did not find rest, but the day of rest, common to all of us, remains. Again, he shows that the office of the High Priest was translated from Aaron to Christ, whose type was Melchisedec, who was not of the tribe of Levi. The fathers were justified by faith, he announces,

86

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

πατέρας σημαίνει, καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου. εἶτα πάλιν εἰς τὰ ἤθη προτρεψάμενος καὶ τούτους, καὶ ἀποδεξάμενος αὐτῶν τὴν διὰ τὸν Xριστὸν ὑπομονὴν, καὶ πείσας τιμᾶν τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν.

not by the deeds of the Law. Then, again, having exhorted also them for the sake of morals, praised their endurance because of Christ, and persuaded them to honor the elders, he ends the letter.

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Τιμόθεον ɀϮьϰϥ϶
ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶
$o#

Argument of the First Letter to Timothy

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Λαοδικείας·

He sends this from Laodicea.

[Prophasis]

[Prophasis]

ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· ἐν τῇ Ἐφέσῳ τινὲς ἰουδαΐζοντες ἐπεχείρουν ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖν, καὶ ἀπατᾶν τοὺς ἀκεραίους προφάσει τοῦ νόμου· τοῦτο δὲ μαθὼν ὁ ἀπόστολος, προτρέπει τὸν Τιμόθεον ἐκεῖ προσμεῖναι, πρὸς διόρθωσιν αὐτῶν γράφει τε τὴν ἐπιστολήν.

The occasion for the letter is this: In Ephesus some Judaists tried to teach errors and to deceive the pure, using the Law as a pretext. When the Apostle learns this, he persuades Timothy to stay there to correct them, and he writes this letter.

[Summary]

[Summary]

καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ὑπομιμνήσκει Τιμόθεον, And first, he reminds Timothy, as he knows εἰδότα τὴν ἐν Χριστῷ πίστιν, διδάσκων his faith in Christ, teaching him about the αὐτὸν περὶ τοῦ νόμου, κωλύειν τοὺς Law, so that he should stop those who παρὰ τὴν ὀρθὴν διδασκαλίαν λαλοῦντας, speak against the true teaching, and rebuke ἐπιτιμᾶν τε αὐτοῖς. καὶ γὰρ καὶ αὐτὸς them. For he has himself delivered unto Ὑμέναιον καὶ Ἀλέξανδρον ναυαγήσαντας Satan Hymenaeus and Alexander, since περὶ τὴν πίστιν παραδέδωκε τῷ they suffered shipwreck concerning faith, Σατανᾷ, ἵνα παιδευθῶσι μὴ βλασφημεῖν. that they may be chastened not to blasταῦτα ὑπομνήσας, λοιπὸν διατάσσει pheme. Having reminded him of this, he αὐτῷ κανόνας ἐκκλησιαστικοὺς περὶ then draws up church rules about prayer; προσευχῆς, πῶς καὶ ποῦ καὶ περὶ τίνων δεῖ how, where and for whom one should προσεύχεσθαι. περὶ τοῦ σιγᾶν ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ pray. About women, that they should be τὰς γυναῖκας, καὶ μᾶλλον μανθάνειν, καὶ silent in the church, and rather learn than μὴ διδάσκειν αὐτὰς. περὶ ἐπισκόπων teach. About the ordaining of bishops, καὶ πρεσβυτέρων καὶ διακόνων, πῶς καὶ presbyters and deacons, and about the beὁποίους εἶναι δεῖ τοὺς καθισταμένους. havior and qualities required of those who περὶ τῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ χηρῶν, ἀπὸ are appointed. About the widows in the πόσων ἐτῶν χρὴ ταύτας καταλέγεσθαι, church, from what age they can be chosen, καὶ ὁποίας αὐτὰς εἶναι δεῖ καὶ πῶς αὐταῖς which qualities are required of them, and




νɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
o
"SHVNFOUB

87

δεῖ προσέχειν. περὶ τοῦ σωφρονεῖν τοὺς νεωτέρους, καὶ γαμεῖν μᾶλλον, καὶ μὴ αἰσχρῶς ζῇν, περὶ τοῦ παραγγέλλειν τοῖς πλουσίοις μὴ ὑψηλοφρονεῖν, μηδὲ ἐλπίζειν ἐπὶ τῷ πλούτῳ. περὶ τούτων διαταξάμενος προτρέπεται αὐτὸν ταῦτα διδάσκειν, καὶ μηκέτι μὲν ὑδροποτεῖν, προσέχειν δὲ ἑαυτῷ, καὶ τῇ διδασκαλίᾳ, εἰδότα ἔσεσθαι καιροὺς, ἐν οἷς ἀποστήσονταί τινες τῆς πίστεως. διδάξας δὲ καθαρὰ εἶναι καὶ τὰ βρώματα, καὶ παραγγείλας αὐτῷ ἐκτρέπεσθαι τὰς ἐμφιλονείκους ζητήσεις, ὡς βεβήλους οὔσας, ἐφ᾽ αἷς καί τινες καυχώμενοι παρέβησαν τὴν πίστιν, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν.

how one should take care of them. About the younger men, that they should curb their passions, rather marry, and not live shamefully. About charging the rich not to be high-minded and not to trust in riches. Having drawn up these rules, he exhorted him to teach according to them and to no longer drink water, but to take care of himself and the teaching, as he should know that there will be times when some will renounce the faith. And, having taught that all foods are pure, he ordered him to avoid the unholy, seditious inquiries. In their boasting of these, some people trespassed against faith. Thus he ends the letter.

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Τιμόθεον δευτέρας ἐπιστολῆς (784BD)

Argument of the Second Letter to Timothy

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει πάλιν ἀπὸ Ῥώμης·

Once again from Rome, he sends this letter.

[Prophasis]

[Prophasis]

ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· The occasion for the letter is this: Because τῶν συναποδημησάντων τῷ Παύλῳ Paul’s fellow travellers had left him and the καταλειψάντων αὐτὸν, βουλόμενος αὐτὸς Apostle himself wanted Timothy to come ὁ ἀπόστολος ἐλθεῖν Τιμόθεον πρὸς αὐτὸν, to him, he writes the letter. γράφει τὴν ἐπιστολήν.

[Summary]

[Summary]

καὶ πρῶτον μὲν σημαίνει ἑαυτὸν And first, he announces that he rememμνημονεύειν αὐτοῦ τε τῆς εὐλαβείας, καὶ bers his devotion and the faith of his anτῆς τῶν προγόνων αὐτοῦ πίστεως. ἔπειτα cestors. Then he makes known that those δηλοῖ, ὅτι οἱ ἀπὸ τῆς Ἀσίας, ὧν ἐστι from Asia, among others Phygellus and Φύγελλος καὶ Ἑρμογένης, ἀπεστράφησαν Hermogenes, turned away from him when αὐτὸν, ὁρῶντες αὐτοῦ τὰς ἁλύσεις· they saw his chains. Only to the great zeal μόνῳ δὲ Ὀνησιφόρῳ μαρτυρεῖ σπουδὴν of Onesiphorus does he bear witness. And πλείστην, καὶ τοῦτον ἀπεδέξατο ἐλθόντα when he [Onesiphorus] came to Rome, he εἰς τὴν Ῥώμην καὶ προσμείναντα αὐτῷ. received Onesiphorus, and he had stayed παραγγέλλει δὲ αὐτῷ παραιτεῖσθαι with him. And he commands him to disτὰς μωρὰς ζητήσεις, διὰ τὸ ἐξ αὐτῶν approve foolish inquiries, as they cause

88

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

γεννᾶσθαι μάχας. καὶ γὰρ Ὑμέναιος καὶ Φίλητος, οὕτως ἐκτραπέντες, παρέβησαν τὴν ἀλήθειαν, λέγοντες ἀνάστασιν ἤδη γεγονέναι, καί τινας ἀνατρέπουσι. μᾶλλον οὖν παραινεῖ αὐτῷ προσέχειν ἑαυτῷ καὶ τῇ διδασκαλίᾳ, καὶ εἰδέναι μὲν, ὅτι ἐν ἐσχάτοις καιροῖς ἔσονται ἄνθρωποι φίλαυτοι, καὶ φιλήδονοι μᾶλλον ἢ φιλόθεοι· προβλέποντα δὲ ταῦτα, ἀσφαλίζεσθαι τοὺς λαοὺς, μή τις ἐξ αὐτῶν ἀπατηθῇ. καὶ εἰς τὰ ἤθη δὲ, καὶ εἰς τὴν τῆς διδασκαλίας ἀκρίβειαν πολλὰ προτρεψάμενος αὐτὸν, καὶ σημάνας τὸν καιρὸν τῆς ἀναλύσεως αὐτοῦ ἐνστῆναι, καὶ μέλλειν σπένδεσθαι καὶ μαρτυρεῖν, ἐνετείλατο αὐτῷ ἐλθεῖν πρὸς αὐτὸν ταχέως, κομίζοντα τὴν φελόνην καὶ τὰ βιβλία. παρῄνεσε δὲ αὐτῷ Ἀλέξανδρον τὸν χαλκέα φυλάττεσθαι, ὡς πολλὰ κακὰ ἐνδειξάμενον αὐτῷ· καὶ οὕτως τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν.

strife. For Hymenaeus and Philetus were thus diverted and offended against truth, saying that the resurrection had already taken place. And they are subverting some. Therefore, he advises him rather to take care of himself and the teaching, and to know that in the last days men will be selfloving, lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God. And he advises him to foresee this and to strengthen the people, so that not one of them will be deceived. And having exhorted extensively in order to strengthen the morals and to make the teaching perfect, and announced that the time of his death is close at hand and that he will be offered and die as a martyr, he ordered him to come promptly to him, bringing the cloak and the books. And he advised him to be on his guard against Alexandros the coppersmith, as he is shown to have done him much evil. And thus he ends the letter.

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Τίτον ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶
$o"

Argument of the Letter to Titus

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Νικοπόλεως, ἐκεῖ γὰρ παρεχείμαζεν·

He sends this from Nicopolis, since he spent the winter there.

[Prophasis]

[Prophasis]

ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· εἰς The occasion for the letter is this: He left μὲν τὴν Κρήτην ἀπέλιπεν τὸν Τίτον, Titus in Crete, to ordain clerics in every ἵνα καταστήσῃ κατὰ πόλεις κληρικούς. city. But there, many tried to deceive the πολλῶν δὲ ὄντων ἐκεῖ τῶν ἐπιχειρούντων people, using the Law as a pretext. When προφάσει τοῦ νόμου ἀπατᾶν τοὺς λαοὺς, the Apostle learns this, he writes. μαθὼν ὁ ἀπόστολος, γράφει·

[Summary]

[Summary]

καὶ πρῶτον μὲν εὐχαριστῶν τῷ θεῷ διὰ And first, giving thanks to God for his deτὴν αὐτοῦ εὐλάβειαν, σημαίνει τὴν ἐν votion, he announces that faith in Christ is Χριστῷ πίστιν μὴ νεωτέραν εἶναι, ἀλλ᾽ not something new, but was prepared and




89

νɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
o
"SHVNFOUB

ἐξ αἰῶνος ἡτοιμάσθαι, καὶ ἐπηγγέλθαι παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ ταύτην. ἔπειτα περὶ τῆς καταστάσεως τῶν κληρικῶν, καὶ τοῦτον διδάσκει, πῶς, καὶ ὁποίους αὐτοὺς εἶναι δεῖ· καὶ ἐπιτιμᾶν δὲ ἐντέλλεται αὐτῷ τοῖς ἀντιλέγουσι τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ πίστει, μάλιστα τοῖς ἐκ περιτομῆς· εἰδέναι τε τοὺς Κρῆτας, ὅτι ἀργοί εἰσιν, καὶ χρῄζουσιν ἐπιτιμίας. διδάξας δὲ πάντα τὰ βρώματα καθαρὰ εἶναι τοῖς καθαροῖς, καὶ ὁποίας εἶναι δεῖ τὰς πρεσβύτιδας, τὰς ὀφειλούσας σωφρονίζειν τὰς νέας, παραινεῖ, πῶς δεῖ τοὺς δούλους τοῖς ἰδίοις δεσπόταις ὑπηρετεῖν. καὶ τέλος ὑπομνήσας, ὅτι ἡ τοῦ σωτῆρος χάρις οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων ἡμᾶς ἐδικαίωσεν, ἀλλὰ τῇ ἰδίᾳ φιλανθρωπίᾳ, καὶ παραγγείλας τὰς νομικὰς μάχας ἐκτρέπεσθαι, ὡς ἀναισχύντους οὔσας, δηλοῖ αὐτῷ, μετὰ τὸ πέμψαι πρὸς αὐτὸν Ἀρτεμᾶν, ἵνα ἔλθῃ πρὸς αὐτὸν· ἐνετείλατο τε αὐτῷ, ὥστε διδάσκειν καὶ τοὺς αὐτοῦ καλῶν ἔργων προΐστασθαι· καὶ οὕτως τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν.

promised by God before the world began. Then [he writes] about the ordaining of clerics, and he teaches him about the behavior and qualities required of them. And he orders him to rebuke those who speak against the sound faith, especially those of the circumcision, and he [wants him] to know the Cretians, that they are idle and need rebuke. Having taught that all foods are pure to the pure, and about the qualities required of the aged women, who should correct the younger, he gives exhortations on how slaves should serve their masters. And finally, having reminded him that the grace of the Savior has not justified us by deeds, but by His own love of mankind, and having commanded him to turn away from contentions about the Law, as they are shameless, he orders him to come after he has sent Artemas to him. And he also commanded him that he should teach his co-workers as well to maintain good works. And thus he ends the letter.

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Φιλήμονα ἐπιστολῆς (788CD)

Argument of the Letter to Philemon

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει ἀπὸ Ῥώμης·

He sends this letter from Rome.

[Prophasis]

[Prophasis]

ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· Ὀνήσιμος ὁ οἰκέτης Φιλήμονος ἔφυγε, καὶ ἀπελθὼν πρὸς τὸν ἀπόστολον, κατηχήθη παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ, καὶ γέγονεν αὐτῷ χρήσιμος εἰς διακονίαν.

The occasion for the letter is this: Onesimus, the slave of Philemon, had escaped, and he went to the Apostle, was instructed by him and became useful to him for service.

[Summary]

[Summary]

περὶ τούτου τοίνυν γράφει Φιλήμονι, About this man he now writes to Phileπαρατιθέμενος αὐτῷ τὸν Ὀνήσιμον, ἵνα mon, commending Onesimus to him, that προσέχῃ αὐτῷ γνησίως, καὶ μηκέτι ἔχῃ he should receive him in a noble manner

90

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

αὐτὸν ὡς δοῦλον, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς ἀδελφόν. and no longer as a slave, but as a brother. πρoετρέψατo δὲ αὐτὸν καὶ ξενίαν αὐτῷ And [Paul] requests him to prepare lodgἑτοιμάσαι, ἵνα, ἐὰν ἔλθῃ, εὕρῃ πoυ μείνῃ· ing for him, so that if he comes, he will find καὶ οὕτως τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. a place to stay. And thus he ends the letter.

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς καθολικῆς ΚϟϨьϠϭϱ
ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶
#o"

Argument of the Catholic Letter of James

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ἐπειδὴ αὐτὸς Ἰάκωβος ταύτην γράφει τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν δώδεκα φυλῶν διασπαρεῖσι, καὶ πιστεύσασιν εἰς τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν. γράφει δὲ διδασκαλικὴν τὴν ἐπιστολὴν,

Because James himself writes this to those of the scattered twelve tribes who believed in our Lord Jesus Christ. And he writes it as a didactic letter.

[Summary]

[Summary]

διδάσκων περὶ διαφορᾶς πειρασμῶν, Teaching about different temptations, what ποῖος μέν ἐστιν ἀπὸ θεοῦ, ποῖος δὲ ἀπὸ kind of temptation comes from God, and τῆς ἰδίας καρδίας τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἐστίν. what kind comes from the heart of men. καὶ οὐ λόγῳ μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἔργῳ δεῖ And that one should show faith not only δεικνύναι τὴν πίστιν· καὶ οὐχ οἱ ἀκροαταὶ in word, but also in deed, and that the doτοῦ νόμου, ἀλλ᾽ οἱ ποιηταὶ δικαιοῦνται. ers of the Law are justified, not the hearers. περί τε τῶν πλουσίων παραγγέλλει, About the rich he orders that they should ἵνα μὴ προκρίνωνται τῶν πτωχῶν not be preferred in the churches to the ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις, ἀλλὰ καὶ μᾶλλον poor. Rather, they should be rebuked for ἐπιπλήττωνται, ὡς ὑπερήφανοι· καὶ τέλος being arrogant. And finally, having comπαραμυθησάμενος τοὺς ἀδικουμένους καὶ forted those who are treated unjustly and προτρεψάμενος αὐτοὺς μακροθυμεῖν ἕως exhorted them to be patient until the comτῆς παρουσίας τοῦ κριτοῦ, καὶ διδάξας ing of the Judge, and having taught about περὶ ὑπομονῆς καὶ δείξας ἐκ τοῦ Ἰὼβ τὸ endurance and illustrated the virtue of enχρηστὸν τῆς ὑπομονῆς, παραγγέλλει durance, using Job as an example, he comπροσκαλεῖσθαι τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους mands them to call the elders to the sick, ἐπὶ τοὺς ἀσθενοῦντας, καὶ σπεύδειν and to be eager to convert those who have ἐπιστρέφειν τοὺς πλανηθέντας ἐπὶ τὴν erred from the truth, because the reward ἀλήθειαν· εἶναι γὰρ τούτου μισθὸν παρὰ from the Lord for this is forgiveness of sins. τοῦ κυρίου ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν· καὶ οὕτως And thus he ends the letter. τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν.




91

νɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
o
"SHVNFOUB

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς Πέτρου πρώτης ἐπιστολῆς (680AB)

Argument of the First Letter of Peter

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ἐπειδὴ ὁ Πέτρος αὐτὸς τοῖς ἐν τῇ διασπορᾷ οὖσιν Ἰουδαίοις καὶ γενομένοις Χριστιανοῖς γράφει τὴν ἐπιστολὴν διδασκαλικήν. ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ Ἰουδαίων ἐπίστευσαν, ἐπιστηρίζει αὐτοὺς.

Because Peter himself writes this as a didactic letter to Jews in the Diaspora who have become Christians. He strengthens them, since they are believers of Jewish origin.

[Summary]

[Summary]

καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἐξηγεῖται καὶ ἀποδείκνυσιν, And first, he explains and shows that faith ὅτι ἡ εἰς τὸν Χριστὸν πίστις ἀπὸ τῶν in Christ was announced by the prophets, προφητῶν κατηγγέλη, καὶ δι᾽ αὐτῶν that the redemption through his blood ἐμηνύθη ἡ διὰ τοῦ αἵματος αὐτοῦ was revealed through them, and that all λύτρωσις, καὶ ὅτι αὐτοῖς καὶ τοῖς ἔθνεσιν things that the angels desire to look into εὐηγγελίσθη τὰ πάντα, εἰς ἃ ἐπιθυμοῦσιν have been proclaimed to them and to the ἄγγελοι παρακύψαι. εἶτα συμβουλεύσας Gentiles. Then, having advised them to ἀξίως τοῦ καλέσαντος ἀναστρέφεσθαι, behave in a manner worthy of Him who προτρέπει καὶ βασιλέας τιμᾶν· γυναιξί τε called them, he exhorts them also to honor καὶ ἀνδράσιν ὁμοφροσύνην παραγγέλλει, kings. He commands both wives and husκαὶ εἰς τὰ ἤθη παραινέσας ὀλίγα, σημαίνει bands to be in agreement. And having ὅτι καὶ εἰς ᾅδην γέγονε παρὰ τοῦ κυρίου given some exhortations for the sake of τὸ κήρυγμα τῆς σωτηρίας καὶ ἀναστάσεως, morals, he announces that the message of ἵνα καὶ οἱ προαποθανόντες ἀναστῶσι καὶ salvation and resurrection from the Lord κριθῶσι μὲν ἐν τῷ σώματι, τῇ δὲ χάριτι τῆς has reached even the nether world, so that ἀναστάσεως διαμένωσι. καὶ ὅτι τὸ τέλος also they who have died before will rise πάντων λοιπὸν ἤγγισε, καὶ ὀφείλουσιν and be judged with their bodies, and they ἅπαντες ἕτοιμοι γίνεσθαι, ὡς λόγον will last through the grace of resurrection. ἀποδιδόντες τῷ κριτῇ· καὶ οὕτως τελειοῖ [And he says] that the end of all things has τὴν ἐπιστολήν. now drawn close, and everybody must be ready to account to the Judge. And thus he ends the letter.

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς Πέτρου ϢϣϱϰтϮϟ϶
ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶
#o"

Argument of the Second Letter of Peter

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ἐπειδὴ καὶ ταύτην πάλιν ὁ αὐτὸς Πέτρος ἐπιστέλλει τοῖς ἤδη πιστεύσασιν· ἔστι δὲ ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ὑπόμνησις τῶν πρώτων.

Because again the same Peter sends this to those who already were believers. The letter is a reminder of primary subjects. He

92

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

εἰδὼς γὰρ ταχεῖαν αὐτοῦ ἔσεσθαι τὴν ἀνάλυσιν τοῦ σώματος, ἐσπούδασε πάντας ὑπομνῆσαι, περὶ ὧν κατηχήθησαν τὴν διδασκαλίαν.

was eager to remind them of the teaching in which they had been instructed, because he knew that his body would soon be destroyed.

[Summary]

[Summary]

καὶ πρῶτον μὲν περὶ τῆς πίστεως ἐξηγεῖται, And first, he explains about faith, showing δεικνὺς ἀπὸ τῶν προφητῶν αὐτὴν that it was announced beforehand by the εὐηγγελίσθαι, καὶ ὅτι αἱ προφητεῖαι αἱ prophets, and that the prophecies about περὶ τοῦ σωτῆρος, οὐκ εἰσὶν ἀνθρώπιναι, the Savior were not human, but spoken by ἀλλὰ παρὰ θεοῦ ἐλαλήθησαν. ἔπειτα God. Then he orders [them] not to listen to παραγγέλλει μὴ προσέχειν τοῖς ἀπατῶσι, the impostors, saying that they will perish, λέγων ἔσεσθαι αὐτῶν ἀπώλειαν, ὥσπερ as also happened to the trespassing angels. καὶ τῶν παραβάντων ἀγγέλων γέγονε. And he predicts in the letter that days will προμηνύει δὲ ἐν τῇ ἐπιστολῇ ἡμέρας come when mockers shall walk around ἔσεσθαι, ἐν αἷς ἐμπαῖκται περιπατήσουσι and wish to deceive some by saying that καὶ θελήσουσιν ἀπατᾶν τινας λέγοντες, our prediction of the coming of the Savior μάτην λέγεσθαι παρ᾽ ἡμῶν τὴν παρουσίαν is in vain, because ‘it is always predicted, τοῦ σωτῆρος, διὰ τὸ ἀεὶ λέγεσθαι, καὶ but it has not yet happened.’ Therefore, he μήπω παραγεγενῆσθαι. ἀπὸ τούτων οὖν orders them to stay away from such people καὶ μάλιστα ἀπέχεσθαι παραγγέλλει, in particular, teaching them not to reckon διδάσκων μὴ ὀλιγωρεῖν ἐν τοῖς χρόνοις· with a short amount of time, since all time πάντα γὰρ τὸν χρόνον μηδὲν εἶναι ἐνώπιον is nothing before the Lord, one day being κυρίου, διὰ τὸ καὶ μίαν ἡμέραν ὡς χίλια as a thousand years, and a thousand years ἔτη· εἶναι καὶ τὰ χίλια ἔτη ὡς ἡμέραν being as one day. But he confirms and μίαν. ἔσεσθαι δὲ καὶ ταχέως τὴν ἡμέραν shows that the day of the Lord will come κυρίου διαβεβαιοῦται, καὶ ἀποδείκνυσιν, soon, and he commands everybody to be καὶ ἐντέλλεται ἑτοίμους τε εἶναι εἰς αὐτὴν ready for it with good works, and to love ἔργοις ἀγαθοῖς, καὶ ἀγαπᾶν τὰ ὑπὸ τοῦ the writings of the Apostle, not paying ἀποστόλου γραφέντα, καὶ μὴ προσέχειν heed to those who slander them, because τοῖς διαβάλλουσιν αὐτὰ, διὰ τὸ καὶ πάσας they slander all divine scriptures as well. τὰς θείας γραφὰς διαβάλλειν αὐτούς. Having then reminded and taught everyὑπομνήσας οὖν καὶ διατάξας πάντας one to have foreknowledge of the things προειδέναι τὰ πράγματα, παραινεῖ μὴ to come, he exhorts them not to lose the ἐκπίπτειν τοῦ σκοποῦ τῆς πίστεως. καὶ mark of faith. And thus he ends the letter. οὕτως τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν.




93

νɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
o
"SHVNFOUB

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς Ἰωάννου πρώτης ГɀϧϯϰϭϩѮ϶
#o#

Argument of First Letter of John

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ἐπειδὴ αὐτὸς ὁ Ἰωάννης, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον γράψας, αὐτὸς καὶ ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει, ὑπομιμνήσκων τοὺς ἤδη πιστεύσαντας εἰς τὸν κύριον.

Because John himself, the author of the gospel, sends this, reminding those who were already believers in the Lord.

[Summary]

[Summary]

καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ, And first, as in the gospel, so also in this οὕτως καὶ ἐν ταύτῃ τῇ ἐπιστολῇ θεολογεῖ letter, he describes the Word as divine, περὶ τοῦ λόγου, ἀποδεικνὺς αὐτὸν ἀεὶ showing that it was always in God and εἶναι ἐν τῷ θεῷ, καὶ διδάσκων τὸν πατέρα teaching that the Father is light, so that φῶς εἶναι, ἵνα καὶ οὕτως γνῶμεν, τὸν we also in this way should know that the λόγον, ὡς ἀπαύγασμα, ἐξ αὐτοῦ εἶναι. Word, like a reflection, is from Him. And θεολογῶν δὲ ἐξηγεῖται μὴ νεώτερον εἶναι describing the Word as divine, he explains τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς μυστήριον· ἀλλ᾽ εξ ἀρχῆς that the mystery that [has come] to us is μὲν καὶ ἀεὶ τυγχάνειν αὐτὸν· νῦν δὲ not something new, but that He was from πεφανερῶσθαι ἐν τῷ κυρίῳ, ὅστις ἐστὶ ζωὴ the beginning and will always be. And now αἰώνιος καὶ θεὸς ἀληθινός. καὶ τὸ αἴτιον he has been revealed in the Lord, who is δὲ τῆς αὐτοῦ παρουσίας καὶ ἐπιφανείας eternal life and true God. And he gives αὐτοῦ τίθησι, λέγων εἶναι τοῦτο ἐπὶ τῷ the reason for his coming and manifestaκαταλῦσαι τὰ ἔργα τοῦ διαβόλου, καὶ tion, saying that it happened to destroy the ἡμᾶς ἐλευθερῶσαι ἀπὸ τοῦ θανάτου, καὶ works of the devil, to free us from death γινώσκειν ἡμᾶς τὸν πατέρα, καὶ τὸν υἱὸν and make us know the Father and Himself, αὐτοῦ τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν. the Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. He writes, γράφει γοῦν πρὸς πᾶσαν ἡλικίαν, πρὸς therefore, to men of every age, to children, παιδία, πρὸς νεανίσκους, πρὸς γέροντας, to young and old men, that God has beὅτι ὁ μὲν θεὸς ἐγνώσθη, ἡ δὲ διαβολικὴ come known, and that the devilish power ἐνέργεια λοιπὸν νενίκηται, καταργηθέντος is vanquished, since death has been abolτoῦ θανάτου. εἶτα λοιπὸν δι᾽ ὅλης τῆς ished. Then, for the whole of the remainἐπιστολῆς περὶ ἀγάπης διδάσκει, θέλων ing letter, he teaches about love, wanting us ἡμᾶς ἀλλήλους ἀγαπᾶν, καὶ ἀποδεικνὺς, to love one another, and showing that we ὅτι δεῖ ἀλλήλους ἀγαπᾶν, ἐπειδὴ καὶ ὁ ought to love one another because Christ Χριστὸς ἠγάπησεν ἡμᾶς. ἐξηγεῖται οὖν also has loved us. Further, he explains the περὶ διαφορᾶς φόβου καὶ ἀγάπης, καὶ difference between love and fear, the chilτέκνων θεοῦ καὶ τέκνων διαβόλου, καὶ περὶ dren of God and the children of the devil, ἁμαρτίας θανατικῆς καὶ μὴ θανατικῆς, καὶ about deadly sins and those that are not διαφορᾶς πνευμάτων· καὶ λοιπὸν διαιρεῖ, deadly, and about the difference between ποῖον μὲν πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ ἐστι, ποῖον the spirits. And now he makes distincδὲ τῆς πλάνης· καὶ ποτὲ μὲν γινωσκόμεθα tions: between the kind of spirit that is

94

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

τέκνα θεοῦ, ποτὲ δὲ διαβόλου· καὶ περὶ from God and the kind of spirit that comes ποίας ἁμαρτίας ὀφείλομεν εὔχεσθαι ὑπὲρ from deception, between the times we are τῶν ἁμαρτανόντων, καὶ περὶ ποίας οὐ δεῖ known as children of God and the times εὔχεσθαι· καὶ ὅτι ὁ μὴ ἀγαπῶν τὸν πλησίον we are known as children of the devil, and οὐκ ἔστιν ἄξιος τῆς κλήσεως, οὐδὲ δύναται between different kinds of sin; when we λέγεσθαι τοῦ Χριστοῦ. καὶ τὴν ἑνότητα δὲ should pray for the sinner, and when we τοῦ υἱοῦ πρὸς τὸν πατέρα δείκνυσι, καὶ ὅτι should not. And [he says] that he who does ὁ ἀρνούμενος τὸν υἱὸν, οὐδὲ τὸν πατέρα not love his neighbor is not worthy of the ἔχει. διακρίνει δὲ ἐν τῇ ἐπιστολῇ ταύτῃ, call, and he cannot be said to be of Christ. λέγων καὶ τὸ ἴδιον τοῦ ἀντιχρίστου εἶναι, And he demonstrates the unity of the Son τὸ λέγειν μὴ εἶναι τὸν Ἰησοῦν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ with his Father, and that he who denies τὸν Χριστὸν, ἵνα μὴ ᾖ δῆλον, ὅτι ὡς μὴ the Son does not have the Father. And ὄντος ἐκείνου, ἑαυτὸν εἴπῃ εἶναι ὁ ψεύστης. he makes a distinction in this letter, sayπαραινεῖ δὲ δι᾽ ὅλης τῆς ἐπιστολῆς μὴ ing that the hallmark of Antichrist is the ἀθυμεῖν τοὺς πιστεύοντας τῷ κυρίῳ, εἰ claim that Jesus was not the Son, Christ, so μισοῦνται ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ· ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον that it would not be clear. For, in making χαίρειν, ὅτι τὸ μῖσος τοῦ κόσμου δείκνυσι out as if it were not Him, the liar will say τοὺς πιστεύσαντας μεταβεβηκέναι ἀπ᾽ it is himself. But throughout the letter, he αὐτοῦ τοῦ κόσμου, καὶ εἶναι λοιπὸν τῆς exhorts the believers in the Lord not to be οὐρανίου πολιτείας. καὶ ἐν τῷ τέλει δὲ τῆς disheartened if they are hated in the world, ἐπιστολῆς πάλιν ὑπομιμνήσκει λέγων, ὅτι but rather to rejoice, because the hatred ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ υἱὸς ζωὴ οὐράνιός ἐστι, καὶ of the world shows that the believers have θεὸς ἀληθινὸς, καὶ ἵνα τούτῳ δουλεύωμεν passed over from this world and from now καὶ φυλάττωμεν ἑαυτοὺς ἀπὸ τῶν εἰδώλων. on belong to the heavenly kingdom. And at the end of the letter, he again reminds them, saying that the Son of God is heavenly life and true God, and that we should serve Him and guard ourselves against the idols.

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς Ἰωάννου δευτέρας ἐπιστολῆς (688AB)

Argument of the Second Letter of John

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ταύτην ὡς πρεσβύτερoς γράφει Κυρίᾳ τε καὶ τοῖς τέκνοις αὐτῆς·

This he writes as an old man to Cyria and her children.

[Prophasis]

[Prophasis]

ἡ δὲ πρόφασις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς αὕτη· ὁρῶν τὰ τέκνα αὐτῆς καλῶς ἀναστρεφόμενα ἐν τῇ πίστει, καὶ πολλοὺς πλάνους περιερχομένους, καὶ λέγοντας μὴ εἶναι τὴν

The occasion for the letter is this: Seeing that her children were living honestly in faith and that many deceivers were walking about and saying that the coming of




95

νɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
o
"SHVNFOUB

παρουσίαν τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐν σαρκὶ, γράφει τὴν ἐπιστολήν·

Christ had not been in the flesh, he writes the letter.

[Summary]

[Summary]

καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἀποδέχεται αὐτῆς τὰ And first, he praises her children for walkτέκνα καλῶς περιπατοῦντα· εἶτα διδάσκων ing honestly. Then, teaching them that the μὴ νεώτερον εἶναι τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς μυστήριον, mystery that [has come] to us is not someπαραινεῖ πάλιν περὶ ἀγάπης, καὶ ἵνα thing new, he exhorts them again about μείνωσιν ἐν τῇ διδαχῇ τῇ παραδοθείσῃ love; that they should abide by the teaching αὐτοῖς· καὶ λοιπὸν διδάσκει ἀντίχριστον that was handed down to them. And now, εἶναι τὸν λέγοντα μὴ ἐν σαρκὶ ἐληλυθέναι he teaches that he who says that Christ has τὸν Χριστόν. παραγγέλλει δὲ, ὥστε τῶν not come in the flesh is Antichrist. And he τοιούτων μὴ δέχεσθαί τινα εἰς οἰκίαν μηδὲ gives orders that they should not receive λέγειν τοῖς τοιούτοις χαίρειν. καὶ οὕτως such people into the house, and not greet τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. them. And thus he ends the letter.

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς Ἰωάννου τρίτης ἐπιστολῆς (688C)

Argument of the Third Letter of John

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ἔστιν ἡ ἐπιστολὴ περὶ φιλοξενίας.

The letter is about hospitality.

[Summary]

[Summary]

καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἀποδέχεται τὸν Γάϊον And first, he praises Gaius, as everybody μαρτυρούμενον παρὰ πάντων ἐπὶ bears witness to his hospitality, and he exφιλοξενίᾳ, καὶ προτρέπει τῇ αὐτῇ προθέσει horts him to abide by the same purpose, to ἐμμένειν, καὶ προπέμπειν, καὶ δεξιοῦσθαι welcome and bring forward the brethren. τοὺς ἀδελφούς· πάλιν δὲ αὐτοῦ μὲν τὴν And again he praises his kindness. But he προσφορὰν ἀποδέχεται. αἰτιᾶται δὲ accuses Diotrephes of not giving to the Διοτρέφη, ὡς μήτε αὐτὸν παρέχοντα τοῖς poor, of preventing others and of speaking πτωχοῖς, ἀλλὰ καὶ κωλύοντα τοὺς ἄλλους, much foolishness. And he says that such καὶ πολλὰ φλυαροῦντα. τοὺς δὲ τοιούτους people are strangers to truth and do not λέγει ἀλλοτρίους εἶναι τῆς ἀληθείας, καὶ μὴ know God. But he commends Demetrius. εἰδέναι τὸν θεόν. Δημήτριον δὲ συνίστησι, To him he gives the best testimony. μαρτυρῶν αὐτῷ τὰ κάλλιστα.

96

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς Ἰούδα ἐπιστολῆς (689AB)

Argument of the Letter of Jude

[Introductory Notice]

[Introductory Notice]

ταύτην τὴν ἐπιστολὴν γράφει τοῖς ἤδη πιστεύσασιν.

This letter he writes to those who already were believers.

[Prophasis]

[Prophasis]

ἡ δὲ πρόφασις αὕτη· παρεισελθόντων τινῶν, καὶ διδασκόντων ἀδιάφορον εἶναι τὴν ἁμαρτίαν, καὶ ἀρνουμένων τὸν κύριον, ἀνάγκην ἔσχεν γράψαι, καὶ ἀσφαλίσασθαι τοὺς ἀδελφούς.

The occasion is this: When some people intruded and taught that sin was something indifferent and denied the Lord, he had to write and strengthen the brethren.

[Summary]

[Summary]

καὶ πρῶτον μὲν παρακαλεῖ αὐτοὺς And first, he exhorts them to fight and to ἀγωνίζεσθαι, καὶ ἐμμένειν τῇ παραδοθείσῃ abide by the faith, which was handed down αὐτοῖς πίστει. ἔπειτα ἀποκηρύσσει τοὺς to them. Then he declares such people to τοιούτους ὡς πλάνους, καὶ παραγγέλλει be deceivers, and orders them not to have μηδεμίαν ἔχειν αὐτοὺς κοινωνίαν any communion with such people, since πρὸς τοὺς τοιούτους, εἰδότας ὅτι οὐκ they know that it is not sufficient to be ἀρκεῖ τὸ κληθῆναι μόνον, ἐὰν μὴ ἀξίως called if we do not walk in a manner worπεριπατήσωμεν τῆς κλήσεως. καὶ γὰρ καὶ thy of the call. For the Lord destroyed even τὸν πρότερον λαὸν ἐξαγαγὼν ἐξ Αἰγύπτου his former people when He had led them ὁ κύριος, μὴ ἐμμείναντα τῇ πίστει, ἀπώλεσε· out of Egypt and they did not abide by the καὶ ἀγγέλων τε τῶν μὴ τηρησάντων τὴν faith. And He did not even spare angels ἰδίαν τάξιν, οὐκ ἐφείσατο. δεῖ οὖν ἀπὸ τῶν when they were not keeping their own poτοιούτων ἀναχωρεῖν· καὶ γὰρ καὶ Μιχαὴλ sition. It is therefore necessary to withdraw ὁ ἀρχάγγελος οὐχ ὑπήνεγκε βλασφημίαν from such people. For even Michael the τοῦ διαβόλου· ἔσεσθαι γοῦν τὴν ἀπώλειαν Archangel could not bear the blasphemy of αὐτῶν ὡς Σοδόμων διδάσκει. εἶτα παραινεῖ the devil. He teaches that they will truly be εἰς τὰ ἤθη, καὶ ἐπευξάμενoς αὐτοῖς destroyed like the people of Sodom. Then βεβαιότητα τῆς πίστεως παρὰ τοῦ κυρίου, he exhorts them for the sake of morals, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. and, having prayed for the confirmation of their faith by the Lord, he ends the letter.

Ὑπόθεσις τοῦ βιβλίου ϰҀϫ
ɀϮϟϬϣϵϫ
"o"

Argument of the Book of the Acts

Ἐστὶν ὁ διηγούμενος τὰς πράξεις τῶν ἀποστόλων Λουκᾶς ὁ ευαγγελιστής.

The narrator is Luke the evangelist. For he was an Antiochene by birth and a physi-




νɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
o
"SHVNFOUB

97

Ἀντιοχεὺς γὰρ οὗτος ὑπάρχων τὸ γένος ἰατρός τε τὴν ἐπιστήμην συναπεδημεῖ γὰρ τοῖς τε ἄλλοις ἀποστόλοις καὶ μάλιστα τῷ Παύλῳ καὶ εἰδὼς ἀκριβῶς γράφει. διηγεῖται δὲ ἐν αὐτῷ, πῶς ὑπ᾽ ἀγγέλων ὑπολαβόντων ἀνελήφθη ὁ κύριος, καὶ τὴν τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος ἔκχυσιν γενομένην ἐν τῇ πεντηκοστῇ ἐπί τε τοὺς ἀποστόλους καὶ πάντας τοὺς τότε παρόντας τήν τε κατάστασιν τοῦ Ματθία ἀντὶ Ἰούδα τοῦ προδότου καὶ τὴν κατάστασιν τῶν ἑπτὰ διακόνων καὶ τὴν ἐκλογὴν τοῦ Παύλου καὶ ὅσα ἔπαθε καὶ τέλος τὴν εἰς Ῥώμην ἀποδημίαν αὐτοῦ.

cian by profession. For he was traveling with the other apostles, and with Paul in particular, and wrote accurately what he knows. He narrates in the book how the Lord was taken up by angels who lifted Him, and how the Holy Spirit was poured out at Pentecost upon the apostles and all those present, the appointing of Matthias in place of Judas the traitor, the appointing of the seven deacons, the electing of Paul and what he went through, and, finally, his voyage to Rome.

[List of Apostles and Deacons]

[List of Apostles and Deacons]

τῶν μὲν οὖν δώδεκα ἀποστόλων τὰ These are the names of the twelve apostles: ὀνόματά ἐστι ταῦτα· πρῶτoς Σίμων, ὁ First Simon who was called Peter, Andrew λεγόμενος Πέτρος, καὶ Ἀνδρέας ὁ his brother, James the son of Zebedee, ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ, Ἰάκωβος ὁ τοῦ Ζεβεδαίου, John his brother, Philippus, Bartholomew, καὶ Ἰωάννης ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ· Φίλιππος, Thomas, Matthew the publican, James καὶ Βαρθολωμαῖος, Θωμᾶς καὶ Ματθαῖος son of Alphaeus, Thaddeus, Simon the ὁ τελώνης· Ἰάκωβος ὁ τοῦ Ἀλφαίου, καὶ Canaanite and Judas Iscariot who also beΘαδδαῖος· Σιμων ὁ Καναναῖος, καὶ Ἰoύδας trayed Him. But after Judas had become a Ἰσκαριώτης, ὁ καὶ παραδοὺς αὐτόν· traitor and died, Matthias was appointed ἀλλὰ τοῦ Ἰούδα προδότου γενομένου, by the apostles, and he was counted toκαὶ ἀπολωμένου, κατεστάθη ὑπὸ τῶν gether with the eleven apostles as the ἀποστόλων Ματθίας, καὶ συγκατηριθμήθη twelfth. The names of the deacons appointτοῖς ἕνδεκα ἀποστόλοις δωδέκατος. τῶν ed by the apostles are these: First Stephen, δὲ κατασταθέντων διακόνων παρὰ τῶν then Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, ἀποστόλων ὀνόματά ἐστι ταῦτα· πρῶτος Parmenas and Nicolas. After this, Paul also Στέφανος, εἶτα Φίλιππος καὶ Πρόχωρος, was called to be a chosen vessel, and he καὶ Νικάνωρ, καὶ Τίμων, καὶ Παρμενᾶς, himself was sent with Barnabas to preach καὶ Νικόλαος. μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα ἐκλήθη καὶ the Lord to the Gentiles everywhere. ὁ Παῦλος σκεῦος ἐκλoγῆς, καὶ ἀπεστάλη καὶ αὐτὸς μετὰ Βαρναβᾶ εὐαγγελίζεσθαι τὸν κύριον τοῖς ἔθνεσιν πανταχῆ.

[List of Wonders]

[List of Wonders]

τούτων τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ διακόνων τὰς πράξεις διηγεῖται ὁ Λουκᾶς, καὶ σημεῖα παρ᾽ αὐτῶν γενόμενα· καὶ ἔστιν, ἃ ἐξηγεῖται σημεῖα, ταῦτα· Πέτρος καὶ

Luke relates the acts of these apostles and deacons and the signs they did. These are the signs that he relates: Peter and John healed in the name of the Lord the man

98

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

Ἰωάννης ἐθεράπευσαν ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι who was lame from birth, who used to sit τοῦ κυρίου τὸν ἐκ γενετῆς χωλὸν, τὸν at the Beautiful Gate. Peter reproved Anaἐν τῇ ὡραίᾳ πύλῃ καθήμενον. Πέτρος nias and Sapphira, his wife, for keeping Ἀνανίαν καὶ Σάπφειραν τὴν γυναῖκα back what they had promised to God, and αὐτοῦ ἤλεγξε νοσφισαμένους ἀπὸ τῆς they died suddenly. Peter raised Aeneas ἐπαγγελίας τῆς εἰς τὸν θεὸν, καὶ γεγόνασι the paralytic. Peter, having prayed for the παραχρῆμα νεκροί. Πέτρος τὸν παράλυτον deceased Dorcas, raised her up from the Ἀινέαν ἀνέστησε. Πέτρος ἐν Ἰόππῃ τὴν dead. Peter saw a vessel being sent down ἀποθανοῦσαν Δορκάδα εὐξάμενος ἤγειρεν from the sky, full of all kinds of animals. ἐκ νεκρῶν. Πέτρoς τὸ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ The shadow of Peter healed the sick when σκεῦος καθιέμενον πλῆρες παντὸς ζώου it fell upon them. Though Peter was guardἑώρακεν. Πέτρου ἡ σκιὰ, ἐρχομένη ἐπὶ ed and bound in prison, he was set free by τοὺς ἀσθενοῦντας ἐθεράπευσεν αὐτούς. an angel without the soldiers’ knowledge. Πέτρος τηρούμενος καὶ δεδεμένος ἐν And Herod expired, eaten by worms. Steτῇ φυλακῇ ὑπ᾽ ἀγγέλου ἀπελύθη, μὴ phen did wonders and signs. Philip attendεἰδότων τῶν στρατιωτῶν, καὶ ὁ Ἡρώδης ed the eunuch when he was reading Isaiah, σκωληκόβρωτoς ἐξέψυξε. Στέφανος ἐποίει and he baptized him. The same Philip cast τέρατα καὶ σημεῖα. Φίλιππος τὸν εὐνοῦχον out many spirits in Samaria, and lame and ἐπέστησεν ἀναγινώσκοντα τὸν Ἠσαΐαν, paralytic were healed by him. When Paul καὶ ἐβάπτισεν αὐτόν. ὁ αὐτὸς Φίλιππος ἐν was near Damascus, he saw a vision, and at Σαμαρείᾳ πολλὰ πνεύματα ἐξέβαλεν, καὶ once he became a preacher of the gospel. In χωλοὶ καὶ παραλελυμένοι ἐθεραπεύθησαν Lystra, in the name of the Lord, Paul cured ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ. Παῦλος ἐγγίζων τῇ Δαμασκῷ, a man who was lame from birth. Paul was εἶδεν ὀπτασίαν, καὶ εὐθὺς γέγονεν called to Macedonia through a vision. In εὐαγγελιστής. Παῦλος ἐν Λύστροις, χωλὸν Philippi, Paul cleansed a woman who had ἐκ γενετῆς ὄντα ἰάσατο ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι a spirit of divination. Paul and Silas were τοῦ κυρίου. Παῦλος ἀπὸ ὀπτασίας εἰς put in prison and had their feet fastened Μακεδονίαν ἐκλήθη. Παῦλος γυναῖκα, τὴν in the stocks. But at midnight, there was ἔχουσαν πνεῦμα πύθωνος, ἐκαθάρισεν ἐν an earthquake, and they were set free from Φιλίπποις. Παῦλος καὶ Σίλας εἰς φυλακὴν their chains. And people carried pieces of ἐβλήθησαν, καὶ ἐσφαλισμένους εἶχον τοὺς cloth from his skin to the sick, and they πόδας ἐν τῷ ξύλῳ· ἐν δὲ τῷ μεσονυκτίῳ were healed. In Troas, Paul raised up Euσεισμὸς γέγονεν καὶ λέλυται αὐτῶν τὰ tychus, who had fallen from the window δεσμά. ἀπὸ τοῦ χρωτὸς Παύλου ἀπέφερον and died, by saying: ‘His life is in him.’ In σουδάρια ἐπὶ τοὺς ἀσθενοῦντας καὶ Cyprus, Paul rebuked the sorcerer Elymas, ἐθεραπεύοντο. Παῦλος ἐν Τρωάδι πεσόντα and the sorcerer became blind. When Paul Εὔτυχον ἀπὸ τῆς θυρίδος καὶ ἀποθανόντα was sailing to Rome, he and all those with ἤγειρε λέγων· ἡ ψυχὴ αὐτοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ ἐστιν. him in the ship were driven by a storm for ὁ Παῦλος ἐπετίμησεν ἐν Κύπρῳ τῷ μάγῳ fourteen days and nights. When everyone Ἐλύμᾳ, καὶ ἐγένετο τυφλὸς αὐτὸς ὁ μάγος. expected to die, the Lord was close and said Παῦλος ὡς ἔπλεεν ἐν Ῥώμῃ, ἐχειμάσθησαν to Paul: ‘For your sake I have given them αὐτός τε καὶ πάντες οἱ ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ ἐπὶ life.’ And they were saved. After Paul had νυχθήμερα ιδ´·, πάντων τε προσδοκώντων left the ship, he was bitten by a snake, and ἀποθανεῖν, ἐπιστὰς ὁ κύριος, εἶπεν αὐτῷ everybody thought he would die. When he τῷ Παύλῳ, ὅτι διὰ σὲ κεχάρισμαι τούτοις τὸ remained unharmed, they held him to be a




99

͑Ϯшϩϭϡϭϧ
o
1SPMPHVFT

ζῇν, καὶ ἐσώθησαν. ἐξελθόντα τὸν Παῦλον ἀπὸ τοῦ πλοίου ἔχιδνα ἔδακεν, καὶ οἱ μὲν πάντες ἐνόμιζον αὐτὸν γίνεσθαι νεκρόν· ὡς δὲ ἀπαθὴς ἔμεινεν, ἐνόμισαν αὐτὸν εἶναι θεόν. τὸν πατέρα τοῦ Πουπλίου ἐν τῇ νήσῳ δυσεντερίᾳ συνεχόμενον χειροθετήσας ἰάσατο ὁ Παῦλος. καὶ ἄλλους πολλοὺς ἀσθενοῦντας ἐν τῇ νήσῳ ἐθεράπευσεν ὁ Παῦλος.

god. On the island, Paul healed the father of Publius, who suffered from dysentery, by laying his hand on him. Paul also healed on the island many others who were sick.

Πρόλογοι

Prologues

Πρόλογος Ἐυθαλίου διακόνου προτασσόμενος τῆς βίβλου τῶν ἐπιστολῶν Παύλου τοῦ ἀποστόλου

Prologue by the Deacon Euthalius, prefixed to the Book of the Letters of Paul the Apostle

[Prologus praeter rem]

[Prologus praeter rem]

[Prooemium: 693A]

[Prooemium]

τὸ φιλομαθὲς καὶ σπουδαῖον ἀγάμενος τῆς Admiring your zealous love of learning, σῆς ἀγάπης, πάτερ τιμιώτατε, αἰδοῖ τε καὶ most honored father, I have obeyed your πειθοῖ εἴκων, στενωπῷ τινι καὶ παρεισδύσει authority and your persuasive powers, and τῆς ἱστορίας ἐμαυτὸν ἐπαφῆκα τόνδε set out through a certain narrow strait and τὸν πρόλογον τῆς Παύλου πραγματείας passage, that of scholarship, to write this συγγράψαι· καὶ πολὺ μεῖζον ἢ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς prologue about the deeds of Paul. In fear of ἔργον ἀνεδεξάμην, δέει τῆς παρακοῆς· being disobedient, I promised a work far ἔγνων γὰρ ἐν παροιμίαις τὸ λαλούμενον, beyond my faculties, because I knew what ὅτι δὴ »υἱὸς ἀνήκοος ἐν ἀπωλείᾳ ἔσται«· is said in the Proverbs, that ‘the disobediὁ δὲ ὑπήκοος ἔσται ταύτης ἐκτός. ἀλλ᾽ ent son shall perish’, while the obedient will ἄγε δὴ τὰς εὐχάς μοι τὰς σὰς ἐπίδος, καὶ be exempted. But come, offer your prayers πηδαλίων τρόπον πτερώσας τῇδε κἀκεῖσε, for me, and, as though you were furnishἔκτεινον πρὸς τὸν θεόν· καθάπερ τότε ing me with steering oars on both sides, Μωυσῆς ὁ μέγας ἐκεῖνος τὰς ἑαυτοῦ χεῖρας stretch out your hands to God, just like ἐξεπέτασεν ἐπαρήγων ποτὲ τῷ Ἰσραὴλ ἐν the great Moses himself once extended his τῇ παρεμβολῇ· ἵνα δὴ κἀγὼ τὰς τῶν ἀερίων hands when he gave aid to Israel, drawn πνευμάτων ἐπαναστάσεις ἐκκλίνω, καὶ up for battle. Pray that even I may escape κατιθὺ λέγων τὸ σκάφος σοι τοῦ λόγου εἰς the rising winds of the air, and that keepεὔδιον καθορμίσω λιμένα. ing the course straight till the end, I may bring for you the vessel of my work into a calm harbor.

100

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

[Prologus ante rem] [Life of Paul: 696A–701A] [The Background of Paul: 696A] ἀρχόμενος τοίνυν τῆς λέξεως ὥδέ πως ἀληθείας ἔχει διηγήσομαι· Παῦλος ὁ ἀπόστολος Ἑβραῖος μὲν ἦν τὸ γένος, ἐκ φυλῆς Βενιαμὶν, φαρισαῖος δὲ τὴν αἵρεσιν· ὑπὸ διδασκάλῳ δὲ πιστῷ τῷ Γαμαλιὴλ τὸν Μωυσέως νόμον ἐκπεπαιδευμένος·

[Saul the Persecutor: 696AC] πρὸς δὲ τούτοις τὸν τῆς Κιλικίας ὀφθαλμὸν τὴν Ταρσὸν οἰκῶν, διώκων δὲ καὶ πορθούμενος τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ θεοῦ. διὸ δὴ καὶ συμπαρῆν τῇ ἀναιρέσει Στεφάνoυ τοῦ ἀποστόλου καὶ μάρτυρος, κοινωνός τε ἦν τότε τοῦ φόνου τὰ πάντων ἱμάτια τῶν λιθοβολοῦντων αὐτὸν καταδεξάμενος φυλάττειν, ἵνα ταῖς πάντων χερσὶν χρήσηται πρὸς τὸν φόνον. καὶ πρῶτος δὲ μετὰ τῶν στασιαζόντων ἑωρᾶτο πανταχῆ, σπουδάζων καθαιρεῖν τοὺς τῆς ἐκκλησίας λογάδας· πολλά τε ἦν καὶ μεγάλα τὰ παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ κατὰ τῆς ἐκκλησίας γινόμενα, καὶ οὐδὲν εἰς ὑπερβολὴν μανίας ἐνέλιπεν· ἐν τούτῳ γὰρ εὐσεβεῖν καὶ τὰ μέγιστα κατορθοῦν ἐνόμιζεν, καθὼς αὐτός τε ἐν ταῖς ἐπιστολαῖς ὁμολογεῖ, καὶ Λουκᾶς ἱστορεῖ ἐν τῇ δευτέρᾳ βίβλῳ ἑαυτοῦ. οὐ μόνον γὰρ οὗτος πάλαι κατὰ τοὺς πολλοὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων ἐμίσει τε καὶ ἀπεστρέφετο τὸ τῆς ἀληθείας κήρυγμα, ἀλλ᾽ ἤδη καὶ μείζονα παντὸς τοῦ ἔθνους ὀργὴν ἐποιεῖτο. ὡς γὰρ εἶδε τὸ κήρυγμα διαλάμψαν, καὶ τὸν τῆς ἀληθείας εὐθαλῆ λόγον ἐπικρατέστερον τῆς Ἰουδαϊκῆς διδασκαλίας γενόμενον, παθὼν πρὸς τοῦτο, καὶ νομίσας ἀδικεῖσθαι τὰ μέγιστα τῆς διδασκαλίας αὐτῶν ἀνατρεπομένης, πᾶσαν προθυμίαν καὶ σπουδὴν κατὰ τῶν τῆς ἐκκλησίας θρεμμάτων, ἐποιεῖτο, ὅπως

[Prologus ante rem] [Life of Paul] [The Background of Paul] Beginning now this speech, I will describe what contains the truth. Paul the Apostle was a Hebrew by race, of the tribe of Benjamin, belonging to the party of the Pharisees, educated in the Law of Moses by Gamaliel, the faithful teacher.

[Saul the Persecutor] Further, he lived in Tarsus, the eye-stone of Cilicia, persecuting and seeking to destroy the Church of God. For this very reason, he was present at the slaughter of Stephen, the apostle and the martyr, and he was also then taking part in the killing, as he received the mantles of all those who stoned him, to watch over them so that he could use the hands of all to kill. And he was seen everywhere as the most prominent among the rioters, eager to destroy the elect of the Church. Many and grave were the deeds that he committed against the Church, and he left nothing behind in excessive fury, because in this he believed he was acting piously and that he was setting the greatest things right, as both he himself confesses in his letters, and as Luke tells us in his second book. For not only did he in the beginning hate and turn away from the message of truth, like most Jews did, but he now nourished in himself an anger even greater than that of the whole people. For when he saw the radiance of the message and the blossoming word of truth growing stronger than the Jewish teaching, suffering because of this, and considering the greatest things offended as their teaching was being overthrown, he created in himself great zeal and eager-




͑Ϯшϩϭϡϭϧ
o
1SPMPHVFT

ἂν αὐτοὺς ἢ τῆς ἀληθοῦς διδασκαλίας ἀποστήσειεν, ἢ δίκην ἀξίαν τῆς εἰς τὸν Χριστὸν πίστεως εἰσπράξειεν.

[Paul’s Conversion: $o#>

101

ness directed against the nurslings of the Church, that they either should renounce the true teaching or suffer just punishment for their faith in Christ.

[Paul’s Conversion]

κομισάμενος δὲ ὁ Παῦλος παρὰ τῶν And when Paul at that time had received ἱερέων καὶ διδασκάλων ἐπιστολὰς κατ᾽ letters from the priests and the teachers to ἐκεῖνο καιροῦ πρὸς τοὺς ἐν Δαμασκῷ the Jews in Damascus, he set out, roaring Ἰουδαίους, ὥρμησε μορμύρων, ὥσπερ τις like a violent river, thinking he would dash χείμαῤῥος λάβρος, περικλύσειν δοκῶν against the disciples in Damascus from all τοὺς ἐν Δαμασκῷ μαθητὰς, καὶ εἰς τὸ τῆς sides and send them into the pit of perἀπωλείας αὐτοὺς βάραθρον ἐκπέμψειν. dition. Since the Lord knew that he had γνοὺς δὲ ὁ κύριος, ὅτι ἄδικον μανίαν ἐν somehow acquired his unjust fury from a δικαίᾳ δῆθεν προαιρέσει ἐκέκτητο, ἐν μέσῃ just intention, He appeared to him in the τῇ ὁδῷ ἐπιφανεὶς, ἀπεστέρησε μὲν αὐτὸν middle of the road, and with the intensity τῆς ὄψεως τῷ μεγέθει τοῦ φωτὸς, καὶ εἰς of the light, He took away his sight. And τοσοῦτον δὲ μέτεισιν, ὥστε τὸν πάλαι he changed to such a degree that he who οὐδὲν ὅ τι τῶν δεινῶν κατὰ τῆς ἐκκλησίας used to contrive all terrible things against οὐκ ἐπινοοῦντα, καὶ πάντας τοὺς μαθητὰς the Church and planned to wipe out all ἀπολέσειν ἄρδην προσδοκῶντα, αὐτίκα the disciples, suddenly, right there, was δὴ τοῦτον καὶ παραχρῆμα ἀγαπητὸν considered His beloved and a most faithἑαυτοῦ καὶ πιστότατον ἡγήσασθαι. ἱκέτης ful man. For the enemy became straightγὰρ εὐθὺς τοῦ Ἰησοῦ, ὁ πολέμιος γίνεται, away a follower of Jesus, and having cast καὶ παραυτίκα τὸ σύνταγμα τῆς μανίας off his furious condition, he advanced to ἀποῤῥιψάμενος, εἰς πρεσβείαν ἐχώρει, become an entrusted delegate, he conκαὶ τὴν εἰς Χριστὸν εὐσέβειαν ὁμολογεῖ, fessed his faith in Christ and was sent to καὶ πέμπεται πρὸς Ἀνανίαν τινὰ μαθητὴν a certain Ananias, a disciple in Damascus. ἐν Δαμασκῷ. ἰδὼν δὲ ὁ τῆς ἀληθείας When God, the examiner of truth, saw that ἐξεταστὴς θεὸς σωφρονισθέντα τὸν ἄνδρα, he was acting prudently and had become καὶ βελτίω ἐκ τῶν κακῶν γεγονότα, οὐχ a better man who had left the evil ones ἑτέρως αὐτὸν ἢ οὕτως ἀπαλλαγήσεσθαι behind, He declared that he should be exτῆς τιμωρίας ὁ κύριος ἔφη. βαπτίζεται γοῦν empted from punishment in no other way ἀπελθὼν, καὶ τῶν ἀποῤῥήτων μυστηρίων than this. So he went to Ananias and was γίνεται κοινωνὸς καὶ ὑπερασπιστὴς καὶ baptised, he shared in unspeakable mysterσύμμαχος ἀξιόχρεως τοῦ κηρύγματος· ies and became a remarkable defender and champion of the message.

102

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

[The Beginnings of His Work: 697BC] καὶ καινὸν κήρυγμα ἐμπιστευθεὶς παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ καινοτέραν ἔσχε τῆς σωτηρίας τὴν ἀφορμήν. τοσαύτην οὖν μεταβολὴν ὁ μακάριος Παῦλος ἐσχηκὼς, ἔτι δὲ καὶ τοὔνομα μεταβαλὼν, καὶ καθ᾽ ἑτέραν ГɀϟϩϥϦϣъϯϟ϶
ϟЯϰϭѼ
ɀϮϭϯϥϡϭϮцϟϫ
o
Σαῦλος γὰρ ἐσάλευε καθόλου τὸ πρὶν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, Παῦλος δέ τοι πέπαυται τοῦ διώκειν λοιπὸν, καὶ λυμαίνεσθαι τοῖς ͗ϮϧϯϰϭѼ
ϪϟϦϥϰϟѴ϶
o
Ϩϟх
ϭдϰϵ϶
ϣС϶
ЏϨϮϭϫ
εὐσεβείας ζῆλον μετατεθεὶς, ὥστε τοὺς τῆς εὐσεβείας μαθητὰς, εἴ ποτε συνέβη αὐτὸν ἀπολειφθῆναι, διὰ γραμμάτων ἐβεβαίου, ἵνα μὴ μόνον τὴν διὰ τῶν ἔργων, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν ἐκ τῶν λόγων εἰς τὸ μετέπειτα κτήσωνται διδασκαλίαν, καὶ ἀμφοτέρωθεν ὀχυρωθέντες, ἄσειστον τῆς εὐσεβείας ἔρυμα ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ περιφέροιεν.

[His Great Missionary Travels Among the (FOUJMFT
$o">

[The Beginnings of His Work] And entrusted with a new message from God, he received a newer way to salvation. The blessed Paul changed so much that he even changed his name, having CFDPNF
USVF
UP
IJT
OFX
OBNF
o
GPS
4BVM
indeed used to shake the entire church, but Paul had now ceased to persecute and destroy the disciples of Christ. Thus he transformed his zeal into the utmost piety, strengthening the pious disciples with letters if he sometimes happened to be absent, in order that they for the future might acquire the teaching not only through his deeds, but also through his words, and, being strengthened by both, they might carry an unshakeable stronghold of piety within their souls.

[His Great Mission Travels Among the Gentiles]

μετὰ δὲ χρόνον τινὰ εἰς Ἰερουσαλὴμ πάλιν After some time, Paul again went up to ὁ Παῦλος ἐκτρέχει, ὀψόμενος τὸν Πέτρον· Jerusalem, to see Peter. Then they also diἔνθα δὴ καὶ διαιροῦνται πρὸς ἀλλήλους vided the whole world between them, and ἅπασαν τὴν οἰκουμένην, καὶ τὴν τῶν after Paul received the part of the Gentiles, ἐθνῶν μερίδα Παῦλος λαβὼν, ὡς δὴ τοῦ as it befell Peter to teach the Jewish people, Πέτρου τὸ Ἰουδαϊκὸν διδάσκειν λαχόντος, he traversed many cities and many lands, πολλὰς μὲν πόλεις, πολλὰς δὲ χώρας and he almost filled all of Illyricum with περιενόστησεν, μικροῦ δὲ τὸ Ἰλλυρικὸν the teachings of faith in Christ. Truly, he ἅπαν τῶν τῆς εἰς Χριστὸν εὐσεβείας suffered and endured countless horrors for δογμάτων ἐνέπλησε. μυρία γοῦν πάνδεινα the sake of his belief in Christ, and he went παθὼν καὶ ὑποστὰς ὑπὲρ τῆς εἰς Χριστὸν through many and various dangers for the πίστεως, τλὰς δὲ πολλοὺς καὶ διαφόρους sake of the Gospel, as he himself recounts, κινδύνους, ὅσους αὐτὸς ἀναγράφεται, but, having struggled hard for faith, he ὑπὲρ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, καὶ τοὺς ὅλους vanquished them all. For at that time, God αὐτὸς νικήσας, καὶ ἐξαγωνισάμενος τῇ still wanted Paul, and the unspeakable plan πίστει. εἰς ἔτι γὰρ τότε ἤθελε Παῦλον ὁ and decision of the Lord kept him living θεὸς, καὶ ἡ ἄῤῥητος τοῦ κυρίου βουλὴ, καὶ among men until he had proclaimed the ἡ προθεσμία αὐτοῦ, τοῦτον κατεῖχε μετὰ Gospel to all nations.




͑Ϯшϩϭϡϭϧ
o
1SPMPHVFT

103

ἀνθρώπων διάγειν, εἰς ὅτε τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἅπασι τοῖς ἔθνεσι κηρύξει.

[The Death of Paul: "o"> ὀψὲ δέ που τῆς ὥρας, αὖθις ὁ Παῦλος ἐπάνεισιν εἰς Ἰεροσόλυμα, τοὺς ἐκεῖσε ἁγίους ἐπισκεψόμενος, καὶ τοῖς πτωχοῖς ἐπικουρήσων. ἐν δὲ τῷ μεταξὺ στάσις κατειλήφει τις τὴν πόλιν, καὶ ὁ δῆμος ἦν ἐν θορύβῳ πολλῷ, Ἰουδαίων ταραττόντων τὸ κοινόν. δεινὸν γὰρ καὶ βαρὺ ἡγήσαντο κατήγορον ἔχειν τὸν πάλαι προστάτην καὶ κοινωνὸν αὐτῶν τῆς μανίας, καὶ ἀποκτείνειν αὐτὸν ἔσπευδον. ἀλλ᾽ εὐθὺς ὁ χιλίαρχος Λυσίας τοῦτον ἐξαιρεῖται, καὶ μετὰ στρατιωτικῆς βοηθείας εἰς τὴν Καισάρειαν εἰς τὸν ἡγούμενον ἐκπέμπει. συνελάμβανον οὖν αὐτὸν καὶ πρὸς τὸν ἐθνάρχην ἦγον· Φῆλιξ ἦν ὄνομα αὐτῷ. αἰσθόμενος δὲ συσκευήν τινα κατ᾽ αὐτοῦ γινομένην ὑπὸ Ἰουδαίων ὁ Παῦλος, εὐθὺς ἐπὶ τοῦ βήματος ἐπιβοᾶται τὸν καίσαρα, καὶ ἀνεῖται μὲν τέως τοῦ κριτηρίου, ἀργεῖ δὲ ἡ κατ᾽ αὐτοῦ τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις μελετωμένη ἐπιβουλή. καὶ λοιπὸν εἰς τὴν Ῥώμην ὑπὸ τῶν ἀρχόντων ἐκπέμπεται πρὸς καίσαρα, κἀκεῖσε τοὺς αὐτοὺς ἀγῶνας ἐπιδειξάμενος, καὶ ὑπὲρ τῶν αὐτῶν ἄθλων πονήσας, τέλος καὶ αὐτῆς τῆς ζωῆς ὑπὲρ τῶν τῆς ἀληθείας δογμάτων ἐξέστη, βελτίονα εἶναι κρίνας τὴν μετὰ Χριστοῦ διαγωγὴν, τῆς θνητῆς ταύτης καὶ ἐπικήρου ζωῆς. μικρὸν γὰρ ὕστερον καῖσαρ ὁ Νέρων βουληθεὶς αὐτὸν τῆς ζωῆς ταύτης ἐξαγαγεῖν, τὴν ἀληθινὴν αὐτῷ καὶ ὄντως ζωὴν ἐχαρίσατο, καὶ καθιστᾷ οὐρανῶν πολίτην, ὃν τῆς γῆς ἀπεστέρει. αὐτόθι οὖν ὁ μακάριος Παῦλος τὸν καλὸν ἀγῶνα ἠγωνισμένος, ὥς φησιν αὐτὸς, τῷ τῶν ἱερονίκων Χριστοῦ μαρτύρων στεφάνῳ κατεκοσμίσθη.

[The Death of Paul] And in the late hour, Paul again goes up to Jerusalem to visit the saints there and to help the poor. In the meantime, sedition took hold of the city, and the people were in a great uproar, as the Jews were rousing the crowd, because they considered it a terrible and heavy burden to be accused by the man who once protected them and shared their fury, and they were eager to kill him. But soon the chief captain Lysias took him away and sent him with military escort to the ruler in Caesarea. They arrested him and brought him to the governor. Felix was his name. When Paul realized that the Jews were plotting against him, he soon appealed to the emperor before the tribunal. His case was suspended, and the plot that the Jews had prepared against him came to nothing. And now the authorities sent him to the emperor in Rome, and there he proved himself worthy in the same struggles and he worked hard for the same prizes. Finally, he even departed from life for the sake of the doctrines of truth, as he considered life with Christ better than this life, which leads to death. For when the emperor Nero shortly afterwards wanted to lead him out of this life, he in fact bestowed true and genuine life upon him, and he made the man he took from earth a citizen of the heavens. So there the blessed Paul, having fought the good fight, as he says himself, received the crown of the holy and victorious martyrs of Christ.

104

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

[The Celebration of his Martyrdom: 701A] Ῥωμαῖοι δὲ περικαλλέσιν οἴκοις καὶ βασιλείοις τούτου λείψανα καθείρξαντες, ἐπέτειον αὐτῷ μνήμης ἡμέραν πανηγυρίζουσι, τῇ πρὸ τριῶν καλανδῶν Ἰουλίων, πέμπτῃ Πανέμου μηνὸς, τούτου τὸ μαρτύριον ἑορτάζοντες.

[Epitome of the Pauline Letters: 701A–708A] [Introduction: 701A] πολλὰς δὲ καὶ πρὸ τούτου ἤδη παραινέσεις ὑπέρ τε βίου καὶ ἀρετῆς ὁ μακάριος ἐποιήσατο, καὶ πολλὰ περὶ τῶν πρακτέων τοῖς ἀνθρώποις εἰσηγήσατο Παῦλος ὁ ἀπόστολος. ἔτι δὲ καὶ ὅλως διὰ τῆς ὑφῆς τῶν δεκατεσσάρων ἐπιστολῶν τούτων, τὴν ὅλην ἀνθρώποις διέγραψε πολιτείαν.

joy, and in particular he comforts them in their sufferings. And after this he writes them another, which contains testimony of their progress and of their endurance in face of persecutions, teaching about the end of this world, and about paying attention to their behavior. Placed after these is the letter to the Hebrews, whose followers were the aforementioned. This contains a treatment of Jewish mysteries and the translation of these as pertaining to Christ, which was announced beforehand by the prophets. Up to this point, the letters deal with the progress that is characteristic of each community.

[Paul’s Letters to Individuals]

μετὰ ταύτας αἱ πρὸς Τιμόθεον ἐτάχθησαν The two letters to Timothy are placed after ἐπιστολαὶ δύο. ὧν ἡ μὲν πρώτη περιέχει these; the first contains treatment of teachδιδασκάλων προσοχὴν, καὶ ἐκκλησίας ers, the organization of the Church and on τάξιν, καὶ ὃν χρὴ τρόπον ἄρχειν τε καὶ how to rule and on how to receive comδιατάσσεσθαι. καὶ ἡ δευτέρα δὲ ἡ πρὸς mandments. The second letter, written to τὸν αὐτὸν γραφεῖσα, περιέχει κατὰ the same man, contains according to his προσαύξησιν ἔπαινον τῆς ἐν αὐτῷ πίστεως progress praise of his ancestral faith, as it προγονικῆς, ὥσπερ ἐκ μάμμης καὶ μητρὸς came to him from his grandmother and εἰς αὐτὸν ἐλθούσης· ἐν ταυτῷ δὲ ἑξῆς καὶ his mother. But soon after he accuses those τῶν συνόντων αὐτῷ ἐν Ἀσίᾳ κατηγορεῖ, who are with him in Asia for being of little διακρίνων ὥσπερ τοὺς ὀλιγοπίστους, faith. Only to the great zeal of Onesiphoμόνῳ τε Ὀνησιφόρῳ σπουδὴν πλείστην rus does he bear witness. As for Timothy μαρτυρεῖ. αὐτόν τε Τιμόθεον προτρέπεται himself, he exhorts him to turn away from τῶν βιωτικῶν πραγμάτων ἑαυτὸν the affairs of this life, and he reminds him ἀλλοτριοῦν, καὶ ὑπομιμνήσκει δὲ, καὶ and calls him to witness for the sake of μαρτύρεται τοῦ κηρύγματος χάριν· the message. When he has given him apπροεπαινέσας δὲ τὰ δέοντα, ὕστερον proval in advance, as is needed, he later καὶ περὶ τοῦ καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν διεξοδικοῦ writes also about his final journey, after he τέλους ἐπιστέλλει, προειπὼν περὶ τῆς has foretold the rising of the heretics sayτῶν αἱρεσιωτῶν ἐπαναστάσεως, καὶ ὡς ing that he should not be surprised. When οὐ δεῖ ξενίζεσθαι. πολλῶν δὲ τὸν τρόπον he has explained the ways of the many, he ἐκθέμενος, πρὸς αὐτὸν ἥκειν κελεύει. orders him to come. Perhaps he might see τάχα δ᾽ ἂν δύναιτο τοῦτον3 καὶ πρὸς τὸ τέλος ὁρᾶν τῆς αὐτοῦ συμπληρώσεως, 3

In the printed editions: κελεύει τάχα δι᾽ ἂν δύναιτο τοῦτον, which does not make any sense.




͑Ϯшϩϭϡϭϧ
o
1SPMPHVFT

ὅπερ ἔδειξεν εἰπών· »σπένδομαι ἤδη, καὶ ὁ καιρὸς τῆς ἀναλύσεώς μου ἐφεστηκεν«. ἡ δὲ πρὸς Τίτον, ὁποίους τινὰς εἶναι κληρικοὺς διαγράφει, καὶ διάταξιν ἐκκλησίας. ἡ δὲ πρὸς Φιλήμονα ἐπιστολὴ γέγραπται περὶ πιστοῦ οἰκέτου Ὀνησίμου, ὃς τὸ πρῶτον ἀχρεῖος ὢν, μεταβαλλόμενός τε, ἐλευθερίας ἀξιοῦται πρεσβεύσαντος τοῦ ἀποστόλου· ἀλλὰ δὴ καὶ μάρτυς Χριστοῦ γεγένηται ἐν τῇ Ῥωμαίων πόλει ἐπὶ Τερτύλλου τὸ τηνικαῦτα τὴν ἔπαρχον ἐξουσίαν διέποντος, τῇ τῶν σκελῶν κλάσει τὴν ψῆφoν ὑπομείνας τοῦ μαρτυρίου.

[Conclusion: 708A] οὕτως ἡ πᾶσα βίβλος περιέχει παντοῖον εἶδος πολιτειῶν κατὰ προσαύξησιν·

[Editorial Notice: 708A]

107

him close to the end of his completion, as he pointed out by saying: ‘I am already on the point of being sacrificed; the time of my departure has drawn near.’ In the letter to Titus, he describes what kind of men clerics are, and the organization of the Church. The letter to Philemon is written about the faithful slave Onesimus, who was previously useless, who changed, and, with the intercession of the Apostle, was deemed worthy of freedom. But he became a martyr for the sake of Christ in the city of the Romans, when Tertullus was prefect. By the shattering of his legs he suffered the lot of martyrdom.

[Conclusion] Thus, the book as a whole includes every aspect of proper social conduct arranged according to progress.

[Editorial Notice]

καὶ τὰ μὲν κατ᾽ ἐπιτομὴν παρ᾽ ἡμῶν So far, let this be said about them as deεἰρήσθω περὶ αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τοσοῦτον· καθ᾽ scribed in our epitome. But in the followἑκάστην δὲ συντόμως ἐπιστολὴν ἐν τοῖς ing, we will prefix to each letter a short ἑξῆς προτάξομεν τὴν τῶν κεφαλαίων exposition of the chapters, worked out by ἔκθεσιν, ἑνὶ τῶν σοφωτάτων τινὶ καὶ one of the wisest of our fathers, a Christ φιλοχρίστῳ πατέρων ἡμῶν πεπονημένην. lover. Not only that, but by going over the οὐ μὴν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν τῶν ἀναγνώσεων reading of the text we have with scholarly ἀκριβεστάτην τομὴν, τήν τε τῶν θείων method indicated briefly the accepted list μαρτυριῶν εὐαπόδεκτον εὕρεσιν ἡμεῖς of the divine testimonies, and the most acτεχνολογήσαντες ἀνεκεφαλαιωσάμεθα, curate division of the readings. This we will ἐπιπορευόμενοι τῇ τῆς ὑφῆς ἀναγνώσει· present just after this prologue. ἐκθησόμεθα δὲ οὖν ταύτην εὐθὺς μετὰ τόνδε τὸν πρόλογον.

Jerker Blomqvist suggested the emendation adopted above.

108

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

[Chronicle of the Preaching of Paul: 708B] [Introduction: 708B] ἀναγκαῖον δὲ ἡγησάμην ἐν βράχει καὶ τὸν χρόνον ἐπισημειώσασθαι τοῦ κηρύγματος Παύλου, ἐκ τῶν χρονικῶν κανόνων Εὐσεβίου τοῦ Παμφίλου τὴν ἀνακεφαλαίωσιν ποιούμενος.

[From the Passion of Christ to Paul’s Imprisonment in 3PNF
#o#> ἔνθα δὴ τὴν βίβλον μετὰ χεῖρας εἰληφὼς, καὶ ταύτην ἀναπτύξας, εὑρίσκω τὸ παθος τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν, ἐν ὀκτωκαιδεκάτῳ ἔτει Τιβερίου καίσαρος γεγενημένον, καὶ τὴν τριήμερον δὲ εὐθὺς ἀνάστασιν, καὶ πάλιν τὴν εἰς οὐρανοὺς ἀνάληψιν τοῦ Χριστοῦ· καὶ μεθ᾽ ἡμέρας τινὰς ὀλίγας εἶδον ἐκεῖ προχειριζομένους τοὺς ἀποστόλους εἰς διακονίαν τὸν αὐτοφερώνυμον Στέφανον καὶ τοὺς ἀμφ᾽ αὐτόν. καὶ μετέπειτα στάσιν Ἰουδαίων πλείστην καταλαμβάνω, καθὼς ἤδη προείπαμεν, καὶ τὸν Στέφανον ἀγωνιζόμενον ἐκεῖσε, καὶ τὸν Παῦλον συνευδοκοῦντα πάνυ τῷ φόνῳ, ὃς μικρὸν ὕστερον τοῖς ἄρχουσι τῶν Ἰουδαίων παραστὰς, ἐπιστολὰς ἐκομίζετο πρὸς τοὺς ἐν Δαμασκῷ Ἰουδαίους κατὰ τῶν μαθητῶν. κατὰ μέσην δὲ τὴν ὁδὸν ἡ κλῆσις αὐτῷ γεγένηται παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ, ὡς μικρῷ προσαναλωθῆναι τὸ ἔτος ἐκεῖνο. ἐπιλαβομένου δῆτα τοῦ ἐννεακαιδεκάτου ἔτους Τιβερίου καίσαρος κατάρξασθαι τὸν Παῦλον τοῦ κηρύγματός φησιν ἡ ἱστορία, καὶ τὴν ἅπασαν οἰκουμένην διαδραμεῖν, εὐαγγελιζόμενον τὴν εἰς Χριστὸν εὐσέβειαν, μέχρι τρισκαιδεκάτου ἔτους Κλαυδίου καίσαρος, ἡγεμονεύοντος τότε τῆς Ἰουδαίας Φήλικος, ἐφ᾽ οὗ κατηγορηθεὶς ὑπὸ Ἰουδαίων τὴν ἀπολογίαν ἐποιήσατο

[Chronicle of the Preaching of Paul] [Introduction] I also considered it necessary to indicate briefly the period of time covered by the preaching of Paul, by making a summary based on the chronological tables of Eusebius, the disciple of Pamphilus.

[From the Passion of Christ to Paul’s Imprisonment in Rome] When I get the book in my hand and open it, I find that the passion of our Savior, His resurrection on the third day, and the assumption of Christ back to heaven happened in the eighteenth year of the emperor Tiberius. And I saw there that the apostles after a few days elected the well-named Stephen and his companions to serve as deacons. I learn that after this there was a huge insurrection among the Jews, as we have already stated, and that Stephen then fought his fight, while Paul indeed approved of the murder. Soon he met the leaders of the Jews and received letters to the Jews in Damascus against the disciples. But in the middle of his journey the call came to him from God. This was a short time before the end of the year. When the nineteenth year of the emperor Tiberius began, Paul began to preach the message, the story tells, and he traversed the whole world preaching faith in Christ, until the thirteenth year of the emperor Claudius, when Felix was governor in Judaea. When Paul was accused by the Jews, he defended himself before him. But he kept the Apostle for two years in the prison of Caesarea. When Porcius Festus succeeded him in office, he soon wanted




͑Ϯшϩϭϡϭϧ
o
1SPMPHVFT

Παῦλος· ὃς δὴ τὸν ἀπόστολον εἰς τὸ κατὰ Καισάρειαν δεσμωτήριον καθεῖρξεν ἐπὶ δυσὶν ἔτεσι· μεθ᾽ ὃν διαδεξάμενος τὴν ἀρχὴν Πόρκιος Φῆστος εὐθὺς ὥρμησεν ἀνακρίνειν τὸν ἀπόστολον, τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις μεγίστην ἐν τούτῳ χάριν κατατιθέμενος. τότε οὖν ὁ μακάριος νομίσας οὐκ ἄλλως ἀπαλλαγήσεσθαι τῆς ἐπιβουλῆς, ἢ καίσαρα ἐπικαλεσάμενος, ἑστὼς ἐπὶ τοῦ βήματος ἐπεκαλέσατο καίσαρα, καὶ εἰς Ῥώμην ἐκπέμπεται πρὸς Νέρωνα τὸν καίσαρα· συνῆν δὲ αὐτῷ καὶ Ἀρίσταρχος, ὃν καὶ εἰκότως συναιχμαλωτόν που τῶν ἐπιστολῶν ἀποκαλεῖ, καὶ Λουκᾶς ὁ τὰς πράξεις τῶν ἀποστόλων γραφῇ παραδούς. κἀκεῖσε οὖν ἐπὶ τῆς Ῥωμαίων ὁ Παῦλος διετίαν ὅλην αὖθις ἐφυλάττετο·

[On the Use of Sources: 709B]

109

to reopen his case, thus presenting a great favor to the Jews. Then, as the blessed one understood that he could not escape the treachery unless he appealed to the emperor, he did so before the tribunal and was sent to emperor Nero in Rome. With him he had Aristarchus, whom he rightly called his fellow prisoner somewhere in the letters, and Luke, who consigned the acts of the apostles to writing. So there, in the city of the Romans, Paul was again kept under guard for two whole years.

[On the Use of Sources]

ταῦτα γὰρ καὶ μέχρι τούτων ἱστορεῖ Λουκᾶς Luke tells the story up to this point in the ἐν ταῖς πράξεσι τῶν ἀποστόλων, κατ᾽ Acts of the Apostles, as this was the time ἐκεῖνο καιροῦ τὸ βιβλίον συγγραψάμενος, when he finished his book. Since he had καὶ τὰ καθεξῆς ἥκιστα τότε γινώσκων, οὐδὲ no knowledge then of what happened later, τὸ μαρτύριον τούτου ἐγκατέθετο τῇ βίβλῳ. he did not include his martyrdom, as Luke καταλιπόντες γὰρ αὐτὸν ἐκεῖσε Λουκᾶς and Aristarchus then left him and went τε καὶ Ἀρίσταρχος ἐξῆλθoν. Εὐσέβιος away. But Eusebius, who has accurately δὲ, τοὺς μετέπειτα χρόνους ἀκριβῶς described the following period, has told περιεργασάμενος, ἱστόρησεν ἡμῖν καὶ us also the story of his martyrdom in the ἐν τῷ δευτέρῳ τόμῳ τῆς ἐκκλησιαστικῆς second book of his History of the Church. ἱστορίας τούτου καὶ τὸ μαρτύριον.

[From Paul’s First Defense to IJT
.BSUZSEPN
#o"> καί φησι τὸν Παῦλον ἄνετον διατρίψαι, καὶ τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ λόγον ἀκωλύτως κηρύξαι ἐπισημηνάμενος. τότε μὲν οὖν ἐπὶ Νέρωνος ἀπολογησάμενον τὸν Παῦλον αὖθις ἐπὶ τὴν τοῦ κηρύγματος διακονίαν λόγος ἔχει στείλασθαι πρὸς καίσαρος ἀπολυθέντα, καὶ εὐαγγελίσασθαι ἐφ᾽ ἑτέροις δέκα ἔτεσιν. εἰς ἄκρον δὲ μανίας ὁ Νέρων ἀφικόμενος,

[From Paul’s First Defense to his Martyrdom] He says that Paul lived as a free man, and he confirms that he preached the word of God, no one preventing him. It is said that Paul, having defended himself before Nero, was sent from the emperor as a free man to serve the message, and that he preached the gospel for ten more years. When Nero reached the height of his mad-

110

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

ἀνεῖλεν μὲν Ἀγριππίναν πρῶτα τὴν ἰδίαν μητέρα, ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν ἀδελφὴν τοῦ πατρὸς, καὶ Ὀκταουΐαν τὴν ἑαυτοῦ γυναῖκα, καὶ ἄλλους μυρίους τῷ γένει προσήκοντας· μετέπειτα δὲ καθολικὸν ἐκίνησε διωγμὸν κατὰ τῶν Χριστιανῶν, καὶ οὕτως ἐπὶ τὰς κατὰ τῶν ἀποστόλων ἐπήρθη σφαγάς. μεταστειλάμενoς γὰρ τὸν Παῦλον, αὖθις τῷ βήματι παριστᾷ. συνῆλθε δὲ πάλιν ὁ Λουκᾶς αὐτῷ. ἔνθα δὴ συνέβη τὸν Παῦλον τριακοστῷ ἕκτῳ ἔτει τοῦ σωτηρίου πάθους, τρισκαιδεκάτῳ δὲ Νέρωνος, μαρτυρῆσαι, ξίφει τὴν κεφαλὴν ἀποτμηθέντα.

[Chronological Summary: 712AB] ἔστι τοίνυν ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐννεακαιδεκάτου ἔτους Τιβερίου καίσαρος, ἐξ οὗ κηρύσσειν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἤρξατο, ἕως τοῦ εἰκοστοῦ δευτέρου, ἔτη τέσσαρα, καὶ τὰ Γαΐου δὲ ὡσαύτως ἔτη τέσσαρα, αὖθις δὲ καὶ τὰ Κλαυδίου ἔτη μικρὸν ἐλάττω δεκατέσσαρα· ὃν διαδεξάμενος Νέρων τρισκαιδεκάτω ἔτει τῆς ἑαυτοῦ ἀρχῆς τὸν ἀπόστολον ἀνεῖλε. γράφει δὲ οὖν ὁ αὐτὸς ἀπόστολος Παῦλος Τιμοθέῳ, περὶ μὲν τῆς πρώτης αὐτοῦ ἀπολογίας φάσκων τάδε· »ἐν τῇ πρώτῃ μου ἀπολογίᾳ οὐδείς μοι παρεγένετο, ἀλλὰ πάντες με ἐγκατέλιπον, μὴ αὐτοῖς λογισθείη. ὁ δὲ κύριός μου παρέστη, καὶ ἐνεδυνάμωσέ με, ἵνα δι᾽ ἐμοῦ τὸ κήρυγμα πληροφορηθῇ, καὶ ἀκούσωσι πάντα τὰ ἔθνη· καὶ ἐῤῥύσθην ἐκ στόματος λέοντος«· τοῦτον τὸν Νέρωνα εἶναι λέγων· περὶ δὲ τῆς δευτέρας, ἐν ᾗ καὶ τελειοῦται τῷ κατ᾽ αὐτὸν μαρτυρίῳ, φησίν· »τὴν καλὴν διακονίαν σου πληροφόρησον· ἐγὼ γὰρ ἤδη σπένδομαι, καὶ ὁ καιρὸς τῆς ἀναλύσεώς μου ἐφέστηκε«. καὶ ὅτι Λουκᾶς ἦν πάλιν σὺν αὐτῷ, μετ᾽ ὀλίγα τῆς ἐπιστολῆς, »ἀσπάζεταί σε«, γράφει, »Λουκᾶς, ὁ σὺν ἐμοί«. ἔστιν οὖν ὁ πᾶς χρόνος τοῦ κηρύγματος Παύλου εἴκοσι καὶ ἓν ἔτος, καὶ ἕτερα δύο ἔτη, ἃ διετέλεσεν ἐν

ness, he killed Agrippina, his own mother, and also his father’s sister, his own wife Octavia and countless other relatives. After that, he instigated a general persecution of the Christians. And thus, he was roused to bring slaughter upon the apostles. Then, having called Paul to him, he once again placed him before the tribunal. Luke was with him also this time. Then it happened, in the thirty-sixth year after the passion of our Savior, in the thirteenth year of Nero, that Paul died as a martyr by having his head cut off by the sword.

[Chronological Summary] From the nineteenth year of the emperor Tiberius, when he began to preach the gospel, till his twenty-second year, there are four years, and the years of Gaius are also four, but the years of Claudius are a little less than fourteen. His successor, Nero, killed the Apostle in the thirteenth year of his reign. Paul the Apostle says this about his first defense, writing to Timothy: ‘At my first defense no one stood by my side; all deserted me. May it not be charged against them! But the Lord stood by me and gave me strength to proclaim the word fully, that all the Gentiles might hear it. So I was rescued from the lion’s mouth.’ By this he means Nero. He says this about his second defense, in which his martyrdom was completed: ‘Fulfill your good ministry. For I am already on the point of being sacrificed; the time of my departure has drawn near.’ Shortly after this, he writes that Luke is with him again: ‘Luke, who is with me, greets you’. The entire period of Paul’s preaching is twenty-one years, another two years he spent in prison in Caesarea. In addition, he was again two years in Rome, and the last years amount to ten.




111

͑Ϯшϩϭϡϭϧ
o
1SPMPHVFT

τῷ κατὰ Καισάρειαν δεσμωτηρίῳ. πρὸς δὲ τούτοις πάλιν τὰ ἐν Ῥώμῃ ἕτερα δύο ἔτη, καὶ τὰ τελευταῖα δὲ ἔτη δέκα· ὥστε εἶναι τὰ πάντα ἔτη ἀπὸ τῆς κλήσεως αὐτοῦ μέχρι τῆς τελειώσεως, τριάκοντα καὶ πέντε.

[Appeal to the Reader: $o">

Thus, all the years from his calling until his perfection number thirty-five.

[Appeal to the Reader]

ἀλλὰ μήτις ἐπὶ τούτοις ἐμοὶ καταμεμφέσθω, But let no one rebuke me for this and reκαὶ παραγραφέσθω τὰ καθεξῆς τῶν ject the events following Acts, saying that πράξεων, λέγων τὸν Λουκᾶν ταῦτα μὴ Luke does not confirm them. To this a pruφάσκειν· ὃν ἐρήσεταί τις ἐχέφρων ἀνὴρ, dent man would respond: ‘My good friend, εἰ τοὺς χρόνους, ὦ τὰν, οὐκ εἰσδέχῃ τοὺς if you do not accept the period following μετέπειτα τῶν πράξεων, δός μοι, φησὶ, Acts, show me,’ he would say, ‘where Luke τὸν Λουκᾶν ἱστοροῦντα τοῦ Παύλου τὸ tells the story of the martyrdom of Paul!’ μαρτύριον. εἰ μὲν γὰρ τοῖς δυσὶ τούτοις For if Luke had told us about the martyrμόνοις ἔτεσιν ὁ Λουκᾶς ἐμέτρησε Παύλου dom and estimated Paul’s stay in Rome to τὴν ἐν Ῥώμῃ ζωὴν, τὸ μαρτύριον ἡμῖν be only these two years, there would be ὑφηγησάμενος, οὐδεμιᾶς τινος ἡμῖν ἐδεῖτο no need for us to elaborate the chronolπεριεργίας τῶν χρόνων. ἀλλ᾽ ἐπειδὴ τὸ ogy. But since he does not tell us about μαρτύριον ἡμῖν οὗτος οὐ γράφει, ἔξωρον the martyrdom, as it happened much later γὰρ καὶ μετὰ πολὺ τῆς βίβλου γεγένηται, than the time he covers in his book, trust πείθου λοιπὸν Εὐσεβίῳ τῷ χρονογράφῳ, for the remainder the chronicler Eusebius, καὶ τὴν ἱστορίαν εὐγνωμόνως, ὡς φίλος and accept his history with benevolence, as εἰσδέχου. οἱ γὰρ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μαθηταὶ a friend. For the disciples of Christ, receivπειθοῖ καὶ πίστει τὰς τῶν πατέρων ing for their edification the teachings and διδασκαλίας τε καὶ παραδόσεις πρὸς traditions of the fathers with obedience οἰκοδομὴν παραδεχόμενοι, τῆς οὐρανίου and faith, are made heirs of the heavenly βασιλείας κληρονόμοι καθίστανται. kingdom.

Πρόλογος τῶν καθολικῶν ἐπιστολῶν [Prologus praeter rem: 665A–668B] [Prooemium: 665A–668B] μικροῖς μὲν καὶ μικρὰ τολμῶσιν οὐκ ἀδεές· ὁ δὲ ἐλάχιστος ἐγὼ τοῖς ὑπὲρ ἐμὲ πόνοις ἐγχειρῶν, οὐχ ἥκιστά γέ πως πέφυκα ἀκινδύνως γε, ὥσπερ ἂν εἴ τις σχεδίᾳ τινὶ σμικροτάτῃ μέσον οἰόμενος ἐκτέμνειν τὸ πέλαγος, καὶ τὴν ἄτακτον τῶν πνευμάτων

Prologue to the Catholic Letters [Prologus praeter rem] [Prooemium] For a small man to undertake even a small task is not without perils. And I, the smallest one, in trying to do something beyond my powers, have certainly not escaped danger, like someone who believes he can cleave the waves in the middle of the sea

112

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

ζάλην ὑποίσειν εὖ μάλα φανταζόμενος, βραχεῖαν δέ τινα κυμάτων ἐπανάστασιν μὴ φέρει, μικρὸν ὑποσυρίζοντος τότε τοῦ βοῤῥεα, ἀλλ᾽ ἄλλοθεν ἄλλῃ μυρίοις τὸ λοιπὸν ἐγκλήμασιν ὁ δείλαιος ῥιπίζεται. τὸν αὐτὸν δὴ τρόπον ἀρτίως εὖ οἶδ᾽ ὅτι κἀγὼ ταυτησὶ τῆς αὐτὸς αὐτοῦ προπετείας ἀξιόπιστον εἰς ἀπολογίαν ἅπασιν ἀεὶ προφέρω τὴν ὑπακοήν. ἐφ᾽ οἷς οὖν ἔγωγε τολμῶ, συγγνώμην αἰτῶ νέμειν ἀγάπης νόμῳ βεβιασμένος ὑπὸ σοῦ, ἀδελφὲ Ἀθανάσιε τιμιώτατε· οἷα γάρ τις ἡμιθνητῶν ἀναλκὴς ἐμαυτὸν εἰς ἔργον ἐκδιδοὺς, καὶ τῶν οἰκείων καμάτων ὥρας ἑκάστης τὸν μισθὸν πρὸς σωτηρίαν ἀπεκδεχόμενος οὐκοῦν, ὦ φίλη μοι κεφαλὴ, τὸ χρέος ἑκάστοτε τῆς ὑπακοῆς εὐγνωμόνει, καὶ πρὸς συμπάθειαν τῶν ἡμετέρων κακῶν ἄρτι γε νεύσας, τὸ πᾶν ἀγάπης ἡμῖν κρατίστης ἔργον ἀντιδίδου, τὸν θεὸν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ποτνιώμενος, ὅλον τε τὸν ἐν Χριστῷ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἄνθρωπον τὸν τῶν ἁγίων σύλλογον καθικετεύων ἀλήκτως πρεσβεύειν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν· εὐεργετήσουσιν γὰρ, ὥσπερ δὴ ἐκεῖνοι, οἱ τὸ πρὶν τὸν ὄροφον ἀφελόμενοι τοῦ οἴκου, καὶ τὸν χωλὸν καταχαλάσαντες πρὸς Ἰησοῦν, οἰκείᾳ τε πίστει τῶν ἀκουσίων παθῶν τῷ κάμνοντι τότε τὴν ἴασιν πορισάμενοι. δέξαι τοιγαροῦν, δέξαι παρ᾽ ἡμῶν ἀσμένως τῶν σῶν ἐπὶταγμάτων τὴν πραγματείαν, εὐχῇ τῇ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἡμᾶς τῆς πειθοῦς διηνεκῶς ἀμειβόμενος.

on the most tiny raft and fancies he well can bear the unruly blow of the winds. Then, as the north wind whistles gently for a little while, he cannot endure even a small rising of the waves, but the wretched man is now tossed hither and thither by a thousand charges. In exactly the same way, I also know well that I should always display obedience to all, as a sincere apology for this impudence. Therefore, I ask for forgiveness for what I dare to do, having been forced by the law of love, by you, most reverend brother Athanasius. For as a half-dead man without strength I am surrendering myself to the work, expecting a reward unto salvation for every hour of my own labors. Therefore, O my dear leader, accept now with gentleness always the debt of obedience, and in compassion with our wretched condition, give us in return the perfect work of the mightiest love, invoking God for our sake and entreating every man in the Church of Christ, the congregation of the saints, to pray for us incessantly. For they will confer a benefit upon us, like those in the past who uncovered the roof of the house and let the lame man down to Jesus. Then, by their own faith, they provided cure for the sick man from his unwanted sufferings. Receive therefore, receive from me with pleasure, the work carried out at your orders, and in return for our obedience, pray for us till the end.

[Prologus ante rem: 668B]

[Prologus ante rem]

[Editorial Notice: 668B]

[Editorial Notice]

ἐγὼ δέ τοι στιχηδὸν τὰς καθολικὰς καθεξῆς ἐπιστολὰς ἀναγνώσομαι, τὴν τῶν κεφαλαίων ἔκθεσιν ἅμα, καὶ θείων μαρτυριῶν μετρίως ἐνθένδε ποιούμενος.

I will read the Catholic Letters one after another, in verses, and at the same time make a mediocre exposition from this of their chapters and divine testimonies.




113

͑Ϯшϩϭϡϭϧ
o
1SPMPHVFT

Πρόλογος τῶν πράξεων [Prologus praeter rem: 628A–633B] [Prooemium: 628A–632A] ὅσοι τῆς ὄντως πάνυ πως ἀγχιθέoυ καὶ θεοφιλοῦς ἀθανασίας εἰσὶν ἐρασταὶ, τῆς τε ἐπουρανίου καὶ θεοπρεποῦς πολιτείας λειτουργοὶ τυγχάνουσιν, οὗτοι σκοπὸν ἄριστον ἑαυτοῖς ὁρισάμενοι τὸν πρῶτόν γε τοῦ ἱεροψάλτου Δαυῒδ μακαρισμὸν, τοὺς περὶ τοῦ θείου λόγου λόγους ἐμμελέτημα νύκτωρ τε καὶ μεθ᾽ ἡμέραν τῇ σφῶν αὐτῶν τέθεινται ψυχῇ, ἀληθῶς τὸ τῆς ἀγλαοφεγγοῦς καὶ μακαρίας ταύτης ἡμεροτρωθέντες, καὶ τῶν ἐναρέτων αὐτῆς καὶ θείων καρπῶν ἀπογευσάμενοι, τὴν ἅπασαν αὐτῶν ἔννοιαν πάντοθεν συνάγοντες, ἄνω που τὸ λοιπὸν εὐθύμως εἰς αὐτὴν τὴν ἀθανασίαν βλέπουσιν. ἐπιτάττουσι τοίνυν αὐτοῖς χρὴ πειθαρχεῖν, διακονεῖν τε τούτοις ἑκάστοτε τὰ πρὸς ὠφέλειαν· θέμις γὰρ ἡμᾶς, τοὺς παρ᾽ ἑτέρων ὠφελημένους, χρησίμους ἀεὶ γίνεσθαι τοῖς δεομένοις, ἀποφεύγειν τε εἰκότως τὴν ἐν εὐαγγελίοις τοῦ φθόνου καταγραφήν. πρῶτον δὴ οὖν ἔγωγε τὴν ἀποστολικὴν βίβλον στιχηδὸν ἀναγνούς τε καὶ γράψας, πρώην διεπεμψάμην πρός τινα τῶν ἐν Χριστῷ πατέρων ἡμῶν, μετρίως πεποιημένην ἐμοὶ, οἷά τις πῶλος ἀβαδὴς, ἢ νέος ἀμαθὴς ἐρήμην ὁδὸν καὶ ἀτριβῆ ἰέναι προστεταγμένος· οὐδένα γάρ που τῶν, ὅσοι τὸν θεῖον ἐπρεσβεύσαντο λόγον, εἰς δεῦρο διέγνων περὶ τοῦτο τῆς γραφῆς ταύτης εἰς σπουδὴν πεποιημένον τὸ σχῆμα. οὐδὲ γὰρ ἀνὴρ αὐθάδης οὕτως οὐδὲ τολμηρὸς ἦν, ὡς τοὺς ἑτέρους εὖ μάλα πεποιημένους πόνους αὐτὸς ἀφειδῶς καθυβρίζειν μετρίαις ταῖς τῆς ὀλιγομαθοῦς ἡμῶν ἀναγνώσεως τομαῖς. ἔναγχος τοίνυν, ὡς ἔφην, τὴν Παύλου βίβλον ἀνεγνωκὼς, αὐτίκα δῆτα καὶ τήνδε τὴν τῶν ἀποστολικῶν πράξεων, ἅμα τῇ

Prologue to Acts [Prologus praeter rem] [Prooemium] They who truly yearn for immortality in the loving presence of God and have become ministers of the heavenly and godly community, as they have chosen the first beatitude of David, the holy psalmist, as their excellent guideline, they meditate day and night in their own souls on the words about the divine Word. […] and tasted its virtuous and divine fruits, they withdraw their minds from everything else, and now, rejoicing, they turn their eyes upwards to immortality itself. It is necessary to obey their orders at all times, to serve them to their benefit. For it is right that we, having received benefits from others, always are helpful to those who ask and that we fairly can escape the curse of envy found in the Gospels. First, I read and wrote the Apostolic Book in verses and sent it not long ago to one of our fathers in Christ, this mediocre work that I made, like a foal that has not learned to walk, or an uneducated youth ordered to take a desolate and untrodden road. For I have no knowledge that any servant of the word previously with zeal has worked out the shape of this writing. For there was never a man so stubborn and audacious that he himself would cruelly molest the painstaking work of others with mediocre divisions of our unlearned reading. Having recently read through, as I said, the Book of Paul, and soon toiled also with this one, the Book of Apostolic Acts, along with the seven Catholic Letters, I send them now to you. On account of both works, I am asking for the greatest forgiveness for my audacity as well as for my impudence, fairly entreating all together, brothers as well as fathers,

114

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

τῶν καθολικῶν ἐπιστολῶν ἑβδομάδι, πονήσας ἀρτίως σοι πέπομφα, συγγνώμην γε πλείστην αἰτῶν ἐπ᾽ ἀμφοῖν, τόλμης ὁμοῦ καὶ προπετείας τῆς ἐμῆς, ἅπαντάς τε εἰκότως κοινῇ καθικετεύων ἀδελφούς τε καὶ πατέρας, μετ᾽ ἀγάπης αὐταῖς ἐντυγχάνειν, τῶν τε ἐμῶν ἁμαρτημάτων τε καὶ σφαλμάτων, τῶν ἐξ ἀπειρίας, ἀμνημονεύειν· διορθοῦσθαι δέ μοι μᾶλλον ἀδελφικῶς κατὰ συμπεριφορὰν τούτων τὰ ἕκαστα. ἐκεῖσε μὲν γὰρ ἡμᾶς πατρικὸν νεῦμα τολμᾶν τὰ ὑπὲρ ἡμᾶς κατέδησεν· ἐνθάδε δὲ ἀδελφικῇ τινι καὶ γνησίᾳ διαθέσει πειθαρχήσαντες, αὖθις ἐγχειροῦμεν μείζοσιν ἢ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς, καὶ παρρησιαζόμεθα. ἀλλ᾽ ἐν ἀδελφοῖς καὶ πατράσιν ἡ ἀγάπη τὰ πάντα χωρεῖ, οὐδὲν ὑπεροπτικὸν αὐτῇ καθ᾽ ἑαυτῆς εἰς τὸ οἰκεῖον σῶμα ἐπιδεικνυμένη· νόμος γὰρ θεῖος ἡμῖν ἐστιν ὡς ἀληθῶς ὁ ἱερὸς, ὁ φιλάδελφος, τὴν ἀγάπην ἐθέλων ἀεὶ, καὶ διαῤῥήδην λέγων καλύπτειν πλῆθος ἁμαρτιῶν.

[Encomium of Melete: 632A–633B]

to read them with love and to forget both my sins and my errors, caused by inexperience. Rather, correct for me every one of them in a brotherly manner, with friendliness. For the fatherly command forced us to this point, to dare what is beyond our powers. Having now obeyed some brotherly and friendly wish, we try again to do something greater than what befits us, and we say so openly. But among brothers and fathers love makes room for everything, showing no disdain for itself, toward its own body. For we have a divine law, which is holy indeed, the law of brotherly love, always wishing for love and expressly saying it can cover a multitude of sins.

[Encomium of Melete]

ἐγὼ δὲ δικαιώτατα καὶ μάλα γε ὀρθῶς But I will justly and rightly, indeed, recomσύντροφόν τε καὶ φίλην ἐπιφημίσαιμ᾽ ἄν mend to you a familiar and beloved one. I σοι, καὶ καταλέξω τὴν εὐπροσήγορον, will choose the aptly and rightly named; I τὴν πάνυ φερώνυμον, τὴν τῶν θείων speak of wisdom-bringing meditation on λογίων ἐμφιλόσοφόν φημι μελέτην, the divine words, in whose power and in ὑφ᾽ ἣν γεγονὼς, φιλόχριστε, καὶ εἴσω whose nets you are, Christ lover, being γέ τοι τῶν δικτύων αὐτῆς ὑπάρχων, heard through long and sleepless exercises, καὶ τὴν ἐράσμιον αὐτῆς προσηγορίαν busy with her beloved name, as you are ἐγκαταπραγματευόμενος, συχναῖς τε ἀεὶ making her bloom exceedingly. As also καὶ ἀκοιμήτοις γυμνασίαις ἀκουόμενος one of the poets has truly said, recomεὐθαλεστάτην κατέστησας. ὡς ἄρα γέ που mending the most wonderful benefits that καὶ ποιητῶν τις εἴρηκε τὴν ἀλήθειαν, καὶ come to us from her. He almost cries out παρεγγυᾷ τὴν καλλίστην ἡμῖν ἐξ αὐτῆς and says that ‘Melete benefits the work’. ὠφέλειαν, μονονουχὶ βοῶν, καὶ φάσκων And again, the most noble of the wise has, ὧδε· »μελέτη δέ τοι ἔργον ὠφελεῖ«. καὶ αὖ in his advice on how to live, attributed evπάλιν σοφῶν γε ὁ πανάριστος βιωφελῶς erything to Melete. If anyone once showed τῇ μελέτῃ τὸ πᾶν ἀνέθηκεν· εἰ γάρ τις ἄττα her contempt, he set for himself with his ταύτης ὀλιγωροίη ποτὲ, αὐτὸς ἑαυτοῦ τὴν carelessness the penalty imposed by the




͑Ϯшϩϭϡϭϧ
o
1SPMPHVFT

θωὴν τοῦ μακαρισμοῦ ἐξ οἰκείας ῥαθυμίας κατεψηφίσατο. »μακάριος« γὰρ, φησὶν, »ἀνὴρ, ὃς ἐν νόμῳ κυρίου μελετήσει ἡμέρας καὶ νυκτός«. τοὺς γὰρ ἅπαντας ἄνωθεν εὔνους τε καὶ θεοσεβεῖς ἐθέλων ὁ θεὸς εἶναι, πρὸς μελέτην δ ἑκάστου τὸν νοῦν παροτρύνων τῶν ἰδίων ἐντολῶν, ἔφασκεν· »ἄκουε, Ἰσραὴλ, κύριος ὁ θεός σου, κύριος εἷς ἐστιν· καὶ ἀγαπήσεις κύριον τὸν θεόν σου ἐξ ὅλης τῆς καρδίας σου, καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς δυνάμεως σου· καὶ ἔσται τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα, ὅσα ἐγὼ ἐντέλλομαί σοι σήμερον, ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ σου καὶ ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ σου· καὶ προβιβάσεις αὐτὰ τοῖς υἱοῖς σου, καὶ λαλήσεις ἐν αὐτοῖς, καθήμενος ἐν οἴκῳ, καὶ πορευόμενος ἐν ὁδῷ, καὶ κοιταζόμενος καὶ διανιστάμενος«. οὕτως ἄϋπνόν τε καὶ ἀΐδιον πρὸς τὴν μελέτην ταύτην ἔχειν ἡμᾶς τὴν διάθεσιν ὁ θεὸς βούλεται. ἤδη γοῦν τὴν ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ φυλακῇ τῆς θείας διατάξεως παῤῥησίαν ἔχων ὁ ἱεροψάλτης Δαυῒδ ἔλεγε τῷ θεῷ, ὅτι »ἡ μελέτη τῆς καρδίας μου ἐνώπιόν σου ἐστὶ διὰ παντὸς, κύριε βοηθέ μου καὶ λυτρωτά μου«. ἔπαθλον τοίνυν ἀναμφήριστον καὶ ἀναμφίλεκτον τῆς πρὸς τὴν μελέτην τῶν θείων μαθημάτων στοργῆς ἡμῖν ἐστιν ὁ μακαρισμὸς, ὅτι καὶ ῥᾳθυμοῦσι ταύτης ἀναφανδὸν ἀπαραίτητος ἕπεται θεόθεν ὁ ταλανισμός. εἰ γὰρ ἂν ταύτης τινὲς ἀμελήσειεν, πεύσονται, ἃ καὶ μετέπειτα οἱ δείλαιοι πείσονται, ὅτι »ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς, ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά«. Οὐκ οὖν ἀπολῆξαί ποτε εἴη, μηδ᾽ ἀπονεῦσαι τῆς πρὸς αὐτὴν εὐσεβοῦς τε καὶ βελτίστης ὁμιλίας· φιλοσυνήθης τε γάρ ἐστιν αὕτη, καὶ φιλόστοργος, καὶ λίαν εὐγνώμων, ἐργωδέστερον ἑκάστῳ τὴν ὄνησιν ἀεὶ τῶν πόνων ἀντιμετρουμένη. ὅσῳ γὰρ ἄν τις ἐν ἕξει, καὶ γνώσει, πλειόνων γίγνεται μαθημάτων, τρὶς τόσον μειζόνων, καὶ σπουδαιοτέρων ὀρέγεσθαι πέφυκεν. καθάπερ γὰρ ἄν τις ἀγχίνους χειροτέχνης τὸ κάλλιστον τῆς τέχνης

115

beatitude. For, ‘blessed’, he says, ‘is he who meditates on the law of the Lord day and night’. As God from the beginning wanted everybody to be good and pious, he urged everyone to pay heed to the meditation on his commandments, saying: ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your might. And these words, which I command you this day, shall be upon your heart and in your soul. And you shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down and when you rise.’ Thus, God wants us always to have this restless attitude toward Melete. Indeed, already the holy singer David had confidence in this observance of the divine precept and spoke to God: ‘The meditation of my heart is always in thy sight, O Lord, my helper and my redeemer.’ The beatitude is now our certain and undisputed reward for the passion that makes us meditate on the divine teachings. If we neglect it, unavoidable punishment from God will certainly follow. For if some do not care about it, they will get to know what later will be the conviction of even the wretched: ‘Cursed be he who does not confirm all the words in this book of law by doing them.’ Therefore, may we never end or abandon our most pious and noble conversation with her! For she is both sociable and affectionate, and charitable indeed, as she always gives back delight to everyone for his toils in more than due measure. Because, as a man makes progress and gets to know more subjects, it is his nature to strive for thrice as much of greater and more important things. For, as a clever artist who has come upon the most beautiful work of his art, for the remainder he works over again its tiniest parts, adjusting them and bringing them into harmony, he searches always,

116

The Euthalian Κεφάλαια, Ὑποθέσεις and Πρόλογοι

εὑρόμενος, τὸ λεπτώτερον δ᾽ αὖθις ἐξ αὐτῆς περιεργάζηται λοιπὸν, καὶ ζητῇ, μυρίαις ἀεὶ μηχαναῖς τὴν ἑαυτοῦ αὐτὸς ἔννοιαν πρὸς τὸ τελειότερον συνεκτείνων τε καὶ ἁρμοζόμενος· τὸν αὐτὸν δὴ τρόπον ἡμῖν καὶ ἡ τῆς ἀναγνώσεως τυγχάνει χρηστομαθὴς πραγματεία, ὁσημέραι πρὸς θεωρίαν τῆς τῶν καλῶν γνώσεως κατὰ μικρὸν τὴν ψυχὴν ἐξασκοῦσά τε καὶ ἀναβιβάζουσα.

using a thousand devices, to bring his own design to still greater perfection. In the same way, the task of reading is instructive for us, as it every day, in small steps, trains and lifts up the soul to contemplate knowledge of beautiful things.

[Prologus ante rem: 633B–636A]

[Prologus ante rem]

[Editorial Notice: 633BC] τοῖος τοιγαροῦν φιλόλογος ἄγαν ὑπάρχων τὸν τρόπον, ἀλίκτως τε ταύτην, ὡς φίλος, γεραίρων, οὐχ ἥκιστα δὲ ἂν εὐφημῶν ἑκάστοτε, ἔναγχος ἐμοί γε τήν τε τῶν πράξεων βίβλον ἅμα, καὶ καθολικῶν ἐπιστολῶν ἀναγνῶναί τε κατὰ προσῳδίαν, καί πως ἀνακεφαλαιώσασθαι, καὶ διελεῖν τούτων ἑκάστης τὸν νοῦν λεπτομερῶς, προσέταξας, ἀδελφὲ Ἀθανάσιε προσφιλέστατε, καὶ τοῦτο ἀόκνως ἐγὼ, καὶ προθύμως πεποιηκὼς, στιχηδόν τε συνθεὶς τούτων τὸ ὕφος, κατὰ τὴν ἐμαυτοῦ συμμετρίαν, πρὸς εὔσημον ἀνάγνωσιν, διεπεμψάμην ἐν βράχει τὰ ἕκαστά σοι,

[Epitome of Acts: 633C–636A]

[Editorial Notice] Being such an eminent lover of the word, and incessantly honoring this task, as a friend, and praising it always, you just ordered me, my best friend, brother Athanasius, to read the Book of Acts and the Catholic Letters with a correct pronunciation, make some summaries, and divide the contents of both of them into smaller parts. And this I have done with zeal, without hesitation. Having organized the texts into verses according to my own design, aiming at a clear reading, I sent them both promptly to you.

[Epitome of Acts]

καὶ κατ᾽ ἀκολουθίαν ἐκθέμενος In the following I have prefixed a short ὀλιγοστὴν ἀνακεφαλαίωσιν, πρῶτον, περὶ summary of the work of Luke the Evanὧν Λουκᾶς ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς συνέταξε, gelist. He was of Antiochene ancestry and προοιμιασάμενος· Ἀντιοχεὺς γὰρ οὗτος learned in medicine. After he had become ὑπάρχων τὸ γένος, ἰατρός τε τὴν ἐπιστήμην, a disciple of Paul, he composed two books. πρὸς Παύλου μαθητευθεὶς, δύο βίβλους The first of them was the Gospel, the secσυνεγράψατο, μίαν μὲν καὶ προτέραν τὴν ond the book about the apostolic acts. So, τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, δευτέραν δὲ ταύτην τὴν the entire content of this volume is about περὶ τῶν ἀποστολικῶν πράξεων. ἔστιν οὖν the ascension of Christ to the heavens ὁ πᾶς λόγος τοῦδε τοῦ τεύχους περί τε τῆς after the resurrection, the coming of the μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν εἰς τοὺς οὐρανοὺς Holy Spirit to the holy apostles, and how ἀνόδου τοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ περὶ τῆς τοῦ ἁγίου and where the disciples proclaimed piπνεύματος εἰς τοὺς ἁγίους ἀποστόλους ety toward Christ, and the miracles they




͑Ϯшϩϭϡϭϧ
o
1SPMPHVFT

117

ἐπιφοιτήσεως· ὅπως τε καὶ ὅποι τὴν worked through prayer and faith in Him. εἰς Χριστὸν εὐσέβειαν κατήγγειλαν οἱ And about the divine calling of Paul that μαθηταὶ· καὶ ὅσα διὰ προσευχῆς καὶ τῆς εἰς came from heaven, his apostleship and the αὐτὸν πίστεως ἐθαυματούργησαν· καὶ περὶ flowering message, and, to put it briefly, τῆς οὐρανόθεν θείας κλήσεως τοῦ Παύλου, about the many and great dangers that the ἀποστολῆς τε αὐτοῦ, καὶ κηρύγματος apostles endured for the sake of Christ. εὐθαλοῦς· καὶ, συλλήβδην εἰπεῖν, περὶ 150 lines. ὧν ἤθλησαν οἱ ἀπόστολοι διὰ Χριστὸν πολλῶν τε καὶ μεγίστων κινδύνων. στίχοι ρν.

Part Three Commentary

III. Commentary 1. Commentary on the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι 1.1. The Genre κεφάλαιον-τίτλος The term κεφάλαιον may refer to a main point or idea in the pre-text, as does the Latin caput. This use may be derived from κεφάλαιον in the meaning ‘sum’. The κεφάλαιον may thus be described as the ‘sum of a text’.1 The term may also refer to the pre-text itself, as does the Latin capitulum. The ambiguity of the Greek term can easily cause confusion. von Soden attempted to clarify the terminology by using κεφάλαιον with reference to the pre-text, and κεφάλαιον-τίτλος to describe the summary of it.2 This terminology is precise, even if it makes use of a compound expression that was unknown in antiquity. In the present commentary, the term κεφάλαιον-τίτλος has been adopted for the sake of clarity.3 From the perspective of textual linguistics, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι may function as substitutions on meta-level. The ‘meta-level’ may be expressed visually by separating the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι from the original pre-text, placing them in the margins or as headings above the pre-text. The possibility exists, however, that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι in the history of transmission are treated as a more organic part of the original work.4 Although κεφάλαιον-τίτλος can mean the sum of a text, it is not used of any kind of summary. Zuntz describes the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος as a mere catchword or a short clause, often introduced by περί, πῶς or ὅτι.5 This style can be observed in the samples below from the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos that are transmitted as part of his work:

1

See Raible 1995: 58. The term κεφάλαιον may also be used of a saying that is not dependent on another text. For an example of this popular genre, see, e.g., the Praktikos of Evagrius Ponticus (A. Guillaumont and C. Guillaumont 1971). This genre has been described as the literary successor of the apophthegm (A. M. Casiday 2006: 163). The κεφάλαια of Evagrius Ponticus are interesting also because the name ‘Evagrius’ occurs in some Euthalian manuscripts (see the History of Research). However, I have not been able to discover anything in the Euthalian material that points to Evagrius as the author. There seems in the Euthalian apparatus to be no special interest in the biblical text as allegory or an interest in asceticism in general. This does of course not exclude any possibilities, but I would have expected these interests in an ‘Evagrian’ apparatus. For samples of the exegetical work of Evagrius, see Casiday

o

2

See von Soden 1902: 405.

3

I prefer to use this terminology also when referring to the works of other scholars, who do not use it. In this way, I hope to avoid confusion between the pre-text and the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος.

4

A curious example is mentioned by C. Tischendorf (1891: v), who points out that a fragment of a Euthalian κεφάλαιον-τίτλος (ἐν ᾧ, ὅτι καὶ τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ προετιμήθη) appeared as a part of Heb 7:3 in the Complutensian Polyglot.

5

See Zuntz 1945: 80, cf. the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι from the Tetrabiblos of Ptolemy below.

122

Commentary

Ptolemy, Tetrabiblos, κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Book I, chapters ii–vi, excerpt from F. E. Robbins, pp. 4–41. Ὅτι καταληπτικὴ ἡ δι᾽ ἀστρονομίας γνῶσις, καὶ μέχρι τίνος Ὅτι καὶ ὠφέλιμος Περὶ τῆς τῶν πλανωμένων ἀστέρων δυνάμεως Περὶ ἀγαθοποιῶν καὶ κακοποιῶν Περὶ ἀρρηνικῶν καὶ θηλυκῶν ἀστέρων

That knowledge by astronomical means is attainable, and how far. That it is also beneficial. Of the power of the planets. Of beneficent and maleficent planets. Of masculine and feminine planets.

When stringed together, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι form an asyndetic list. The first of the forms mentioned by Zuntz, the περί-phrase, corresponds to a common form of Greek book titles such as Περὶ φύσεως (Heraclitus). This type of book title was common in works of scientific prose. Zuntz has emphasized that the genre κεφάλαιον-τίτλος in antiquity was particularly associated with scientific literature, where a list of κεφάλαια-τίτλοι could be prefixed to the entire work. The technical terms for such a list are ἔκθεσις, προέκθεσις or πίναξ.6 Zuntz uses the examples of a reader who is searching for a quotation in an anthology, for a prescription in a medical book or for some advice on farming in an agricultural handbook. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι will guide the reader to the relevant passage in the book, as they are repeated in the margins of the pre-text.7 A consequence of this is that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι normally have little value without the pre-text. A mere indication of theme, such as Περὶ ἀρετῶν, could be a description of many texts, and the reader who wants to know what the pre-text actually says must consult it. Thus it may be said that κεφάλαια-τίτλοι normally are not intended as substitutes for the pre-text. The intention of κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is thus to help the reader. It should be kept in mind that the amount of help offered obviously depends on the skill of their author. In his edition of Cato’s De agricultura, Andrew Dalby remarks that the titles in the manuscripts often are poorly chosen and poorly placed. Scraps from Cato’s text have been recirculated as headings that may easily confuse the reader; sometimes they even break up a sentence in the original work.8 Gerard Genette has in his study of ‘paratexts’ given a sketch of the development of titles.9 He uses the term ‘inter-title’ for the internal titles of a work, such as κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, and argues that thematic inter-titles of epic, historical and didactic works in antiquity normally were quite simple. Thus, the first four books of the Odyssey were labeled the ‘Telemachy’. The two Homeric epics were each divided into twenty-four books. These were first only numbered, in Greek by using the letters of the alphabet. At some later stage the books were given individual titles, such as the ‘Nekyia’ for the eleventh book of the Odyssey. Genette observes a similar preference for simplicity in historical and didactic works from antiquity. Genette suggests that there emerged during the Middle Ages a new type of intertitle, the descriptive type beginning with ‘How…’, ‘Wherein is seen…’, 6

See Zuntz 1945: 82. Such a list is found e.g. in Plotin, Enneads ed. H.-R. Schwyzer

o
XIFSF
it is labeled προέκθεσις in some manuscripts. Willard (1970: 64/2009: 47), on the other hand, uses the term ἔκθεσις also for the exposition of a single chapter. This use seems not to be found in ancient authors.

7

This is often found in Euthalian manuscripts, see Willard 1970: 65/2009: 47. Also in Robbins’s edition of the Tetrabiblos of Ptolemy (F. E. Robbins 1940/2001), the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι are spread throughout the text.

8

See A. Dalby 1998: 28.

9

The survey of the development of inter-titles is found in Genette

o

Commentary on the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι

123

‘Which tells…’, or ‘About…’.10 This type of indirect synopsis is then found in works of the three branches of literature (epic, historical and didactic) that he discusses. According to Genette, medieval editors also added inter-titles of this type to works from antiquity. The general history of chapter titles in European literature needs to be examined in future studies. In this commentary, the relevance of the Euthalian material for this general history should be pointed out: An important question is the origin of the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of works from antiquity that we find in medieval manuscripts. It should be noted that some of the types Genette considers medieval (κεφάλαια-τίτλοι beginning with ‘how’ or ‘about’), are attested in the Euthalian apparatus. As the earliest witness to the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is Codex H of the 6th century, the beginning of this tradition may be earlier than Genette has suggested.

1.2. The Structure of the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι On the other hand, within the Euthalian tradition there is a particular development that may confirm the view that κεφάλαια-τίτλοι tended to become more complex. This is the introduction of subdivisions (ὑποδιαιρέσεις). The subdivisions are also given titles (in von Soden’s terminology ὑποδιαιρέσεις-τίτλοι). The ὑποδιαιρέσεις-τίτλοι are regularly introduced with the formula ἐν ᾧ. In Zacagni’s edition of the Euthalian apparatus, the ὑποδιαιρέσεις-τίτλοι that occur under each κεφάλαιον-τίτλος are numbered. According to the introduction to the chapter list of Acts, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι were written in black ink, while the ὑποδιαιρέσεις-τίτλοι were written in red.11 All scholars ascribe the ὑποδιαιρέσεις-τίτλοι to the original editions of Euthalius. At an earlier stage, however, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι may have existed without them. Thus von Soden argued that the ὑποδιαιρέσεις-τίτλοι had been added to make the picture of the text more complete. He 10

See Genette 1997: 311.

11

The use of red and black ink to indicate different levels in the text is known from medieval liturgical books, see A. Menne 1980: 64; Hellholm 1995: 17. On the other hand, Robinson

o
BSHVFE
UIBU
the original system of Euthalius did not use red ink, and that the ὑποδιαιρέσεις-τίτλοι were indicated only by asterisks. He quotes a 10th century Greek catena manuscript (Coislin. XXV) where the heading to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts has an interesting textual variant. Here the last sentence about the use of black and red ink is lacking. Instead, there is a reference to the use of asterisks to indicate the subdivisions. These asterisks have unfortunately disappeared from the codex. According to Robinson, the later development of the system is easily explained if we presuppose that the use of asterisks is original. When the asterisks were replaced by letters, some scribes made the first subdivision coincide with the beginning of the κεφάλαιον (as in Codex H). Thus the seventh (Ζ) κεφάλαιον of Heb has in Codex H three numbers on the second level (Α, Β, Γ), the number Α being placed immediately underneath the number Ζ (see the facsimile in Omont 1890: 169). But in Zacagni’s edition another system is used: Here the beginning of the κεφάλαιον is not numbered twice, and there are only two numbers on the second level (Α, Β) which correspond to the subdivisions Β and Γ in Codex H respectively. This is the system that is described as the most common in Euthalian manuscripts by Jülicher/Fascher (1931: 575), who note an interesting correspondence with the ancient κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Gospels. In the Gospel manuscripts, the beginning of the first κεφάλαιον is normally after the beginning of the book: ‘z. B. Kap 1 in Joh beginnt Joh 2,1 […].’ Thus, the first κεφάλαιον in the Gospel of John is the Wedding at Cana. There is a great variety in the Euthalian manuscripts. Robinson lists all five different systems, including one manuscript where there is a consecutive numbering of both κεφάλαια and ὑποδιαιρέσεις (the list for Romans in Paris B. N. Arm 9). Thus, in this manuscript, the distinction between the two levels is completely ignored. Robinson’s hypothesis has clearly explanatory value but a new edition of Euthalius is needed in order to examine the evidence in greater detail. On this problem, see also Willard

o
o

124

Commentary

reproduced the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts without the ὑποδιαιρέσεις-τίτλοι, and found that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι by themselves gave an excellent survey of the book, while the ὑποδιαιρέσεις-τίτλοι were less compact and tended towards paraphrasing the biblical text.12

1.3. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the Division of the Pre-text As a κεφάλαιον-τίτλος is a summary of a specific section, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι presuppose a division of the pre-text. It is important to note that the division of the pre-text in some cases may belong to an earlier stage than the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. Thus, divisions corresponding to the Euthalian ones are found in manuscripts that are not necessarily Euthalian.13 In the present study, the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι are given Roman numerals, e.g. Rom I = the first κεφάλαιον-τίτλος of Romans. The division of the biblical text into κεφάλαια differs from the chapter division found in modern editions of the New Testament. The Euthalian division seems in general to represent an analysis of the biblical texts that deserves attention. In some instances, however, we may prefer the clarity of the Euthalian list without the ὑποδιαιρέσεις, which may be secondary. The following three examples may serve as an illustration: Acts V. About the believers being of one soul and sharing everything with one another (Acts o 
In this: About Ananias and Sapphira and their cruel end ("DUT
o  The κεφάλαιον begins with the summary about the members of the church in JerusaMFN
TIBSJOH
BMM
QPTTFTTJPOT
o
BOE
JT
GPMMPXFE
CZ
UXP
FYBNQMFT
UIF
ĕSTU
QPTJUJWF
#BSOBCBT
o


UIF
TFDPOE
OFHBUJWF
"OBOJBT
BOE
4BQQIJSB
o 
ćF
&VUIBMJBO
MJTU
IBT
USBOTGPSNFE
UIF
TVNNBSZ
JO
o
JOUP
B
Ϩϣϲрϩϟϧϭϫϰцϰϩϭ϶
ćJT
TFFNT
UP
CF
based on the observation that the summary and the following two examples form a unity. von Soden notes that the Euthalian division here is superior to that of Langton, where the story of Ananias and Sapphira opens the fifth chapter of Acts.14 In the Euthalian list, on the other hand, this story is a subdivision (ὑποδιαίρεσις). When viewing the story in its full context, the list is revealed to be leaving much out of the κεφάλαιον. A complete analZTJT
PG
UIF
Ϩϣϲрϩϟϧϭϫ
TIPVME
IBWF
QBJE
BUUFOUJPO
BMTP
UP
UIF
TUPSZ
PG
#BSOBCBT
o
and listed this as the first of two sub-divisions. This may support the view of von Soden that the ὑποδιαιρέσεις are secondary, and that they are not designed to reproduce the structure of the pre-text. 3 John II. About Demetrius, to whom he gives the best testimony. (1 John 1:12) 3 John is divided into three κεφάλαια. The second κεφάλαιον corresponds to a single verse in our editions (v. 12). One may ask why the list describes this verse as a κεφάλαιον. In the pre-text, the name Demetrius appears abruptly. This has led some commentators 12

See von Soden

o
ćF
Ϩϣϲрϩϟϧϟϰцϰϩϭϧ
PG
"DUT
BQQFBS
XJUIPVU
UIF
аɀϭϢϧϟϧϮтϯϣϧ϶ϰцϰϩϭϧ
prefixed to the commentary to Acts attributed to Theophylact (PG

o 
ćJT
QSPCBCMZ
SFĘFDUT
an older layer in the tradition than the Euthalian version.

13

E.g. in Gothic manuscripts of the Pauline letters. These have divisions that are close to Euthalius, but do not have the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, see Marchand 1956.

14

See von Soden 1902: 479

Commentary on the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι

125

to assume that Demetrius was the letter carrier and that 3 John is a letter of recommendation written for him.15 A similar idea is presupposed in the Euthalian division, where the testimony to Demetrius is one of the main points of the letter, preceded by a prayer and followed by the announcement of the author’s arrival. The words against his opponent, Diotrephes, are treated as a ὑποδιαίρεσις of the first κεφάλαιον. Jude II. Rebuke for error, impiety, immorality, mockery, and their false and deceptive acts to obtain gifts. (+VE
o  It is not clear exactly where this κεφάλαιον ends. von Soden notes in his edition that the third κεφάλαιον may begin either with v. 17 or with v. 20. Regardless of this, the beginning of the second κεφάλαιον is marked in the pre-text with the words οὐαὶ αὐτοῖς (1:11). An interesting feature of this division is that some of the accusations against the opponents are also present in the preceding section (Jude I = +VEF
o 
*U
JT
UIF
DSZ
PG
woe that marks the division at 1:11, while the pronoun (αὐτοῖς) creates coherence with the preceding section. The openings of the Euthalian κεφάλαια are often marked with related linguistic phenomena16.

1.4. The meta-terminology of the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι 1.4.1. ΠΑΡΑΙΝΕΣΙΣ a) Rom XVII Exhortation (παραίνεσις) about virtue before God and men. Pre-text (3PN
o 

ɀϟϮϟϨϟϩҀ
ϭеϫ
аϪѩ϶
ЋϢϣϩϲϭц b) Eph VI: Exhortation about unifying love, even if the gifts of grace are distributed to common benefit. Pre-text (&QI
o 

ɀϟϮϟϨϟϩҀ
ϭеϫ
аϪѩ϶
Гϡы
Ъ
ϢтϯϪϧϭ϶
Гϫ
ϨϱϮцѾ c) 1 Thess IV: Exhortation to temperance, justice as if before the judgment, brotherly love and work with one’s own business. Pre-text (
ćFTT
o 

ϩϭϧɀчϫ
ϭеϫ
ЋϢϣϩϲϭц
ГϮϵϰҀϪϣϫ
аϪѩ϶
Ϩϟх
ɀϟϮϟϨϟϩϭѼϪϣϫ
ἐν κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ d) 1 Pet VII, Advice (παραίνεσις) to elders about care for the flock. Pre-text (
1FU
o 

ɀϮϣϯϠϱϰтϮϭϱ϶
ϭеϫ
Гϫ
аϪѴϫ
ɀϟϮϟϨϟϩҀ
Ъ
ϯϱϪɀϮϣϯϠъϰϣϮϭ϶
καὶ μάρτυς τῶν τοῦ Χριστοῦ παθημάτων e) Phil III: Exhortation to concord according to God and to a life in God. Pre-text (1IJM
o 

Ϫшϫϭϫ
ЋϬцϵ϶
ϰϭѼ
ϣЯϟϡϡϣϩцϭϱ
ϰϭѼ
͗ϮϧϯϰϭѼ
ɀϭϩϧϰϣъϣϯϦϣ f) Phil VI: Exhortations, specific ones (ἴδιαι) for some and common ones (κοιναί) for all. 15

See Bultmann 1967: 101; Klauck 1992: 119; and Schnelle 2010: 48

16

These phenomena are not the same in all the apostolic books. We may note the questions that mark the beginning of Romans III, IV, VII, VIII, IX and XV, and the vocatives that open James II, III, IV and V. In general, it is also interesting that meta-communicative sentences open many of the κεφάλαια of the letters, e. g., Rom XVII (12:1), 2 Cor X (10:1), Gal I (1:11), Eph I (1:15). I will return to the Euthalian division of the biblical texts in a future study.

126

Commentary

Pre-text (1IJM
o 

мϯϰϣ
ЋϢϣϩϲϭц
Ϫϭϱ
Ћϡϟɀϥϰϭх
Ϩϟх
ГɀϧɀшϦϥϰϭϧ
ϳϟϮп
Ϩϟх
στέφανός μου, οὕτως στήκετε ἐν κυρίῳ g) Col IX: Exhortation to cleansing, sanctification, love of men, love of God, love of learning, singing of psalms, life in praise of God and thanksgiving. Pre-text ($PM
 o 

ϫϣϨϮьϯϟϰϣ
ϭеϫ
ϰп
Ϫтϩϥ
ϰп
Гɀх
ϰѮ϶
ϡѮ϶ h) Tit VI: Exhortation to evade seditious inquirers Pre-text (5JU
o 

ϟТϮϣϰϧϨчϫ
ЏϫϦϮϵɀϭϫ
Ϫϣϰп
Ϫцϟϫ
Ϩϟх
ϢϣϱϰтϮϟϫ
ϫϭϱϦϣϯцϟϫ
παραιτοῦ i) Tit III: Exhortations that he should give to everybody according to their age. Pre-text (5JU
o 

ϯщ
Ϣс
ϩрϩϣϧ
Ў
ɀϮтɀϣϧ
ϰѯ
аϡϧϟϧϫϭъϯѬ
ϢϧϢϟϯϨϟϩцѨ
ɀϮϣϯϠъϰϟ϶
νηφαλίους εἶναι… j) Jas VI, ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος III: Specific exhortations (παραινέσεις ἰδικαί) to various individuals, with faith. Pre-text (+BT
o 

ϨϟϨϭɀϟϦϣѴ
ϰϧ϶
Гϫ
аϪѴϫ
ɀϮϭϯϣϱϳтϯϦϵr
ϣЯϦϱϪϣѴ
ϰϧ϶
ψαλλέτω· k) 1 Joh II, ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος I: Exhortation about the grace of everyone according to his age and to avert loving of the world. Pre-text (
+PI
o 

̈́Ϯрϲϵ
аϪѴϫ
ϰϣϨϫцϟ
Юϰϧ
Ћϲтϵϫϰϟϧ
аϪѴϫ
ϟТ
ЌϪϟϮϰцϟϧ
Ϣϧп
τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ l) Acts XXIX (excerpt): And his pastoral exhortations (παραινέσεις ποιμαντικαί) to the elders in Ephesus. Pre-text ("DUT
o 

ͳɀч
Ϣс
ϰѮ϶
͍ϧϩфϰϭϱ
ɀтϪϴϟ϶
ϣС϶
;ϲϣϯϭϫ
ϪϣϰϣϨϟϩтϯϟϰϭ
τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους τῆς ἐκκλησίας m) Acts ΧΧΧΙ: The appeal (παραινεσις) of James to Paul that he should not appear as one who forbids circumcision among the Hebrews. Pre-text ("DUT
o 

ϭТ
Ϣс
ЋϨϭъϯϟϫϰϣ϶
ГϢшϬϟϤϭϫ
ϰчϫ
Ϧϣшϫ
ϣЧɀшϫ
ϰϣ
ϟЯϰҁ n) Acts ΧΧΧVIII, ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος I: Exhortation of Paul to those who were with him about hope for salvation. Pre-text ("DUT
o 

͑ϭϩϩѮ϶
ϰϣ
Ћϯϧϰцϟ϶
аɀϟϮϳϭъϯϥ϶
ϰшϰϣ
ϯϰϟϦϣх϶
Ъ
͑ϟѼϩϭ϶
ἐν μέσῳ αὐτῶν … (22) καὶ τὰ νῦν παραινῶ ὑμᾶς The use of the term παραίνεσις in the Euthalian apparatus has been examined in a previous study by Hellholm and myself and the following comments are largely based on that study.17 Annotations BoE
"
ɀϟϮϟϨϟϩҀ
TFOUFODF
NBSLT
UIF
CFHJOOJOH
PG
UIF
QBSBFOFTJT
POMZ
JO
Rom 12:1, Eph 4:1, 1 Thess 4:1 and 1 Pet 5:1. The designation παρακαλῶ sentence (παρακαλῶ-Satz) is found in the work of Bjerkelund which is the classical study of this form. Bjerkelund

17

See Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004 (App. II).

Commentary on the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι

127

divides the sentences into three groups:18 (1) Sentences beginning with παρακαλῶ/ παρακαλοῦμεν followed by οὖν/δέ, the object ὑμᾶς and often expanded with a prepositional phrase. (2) Sentences that do not begin with the verb παρακαλῶ but have the typical structure of the παρακαλῶ sentence. (3) Sentences that do not have the typical structure but still should be included in this group because of their function. His study is most useful for understanding the structure of the Pauline letters, even if some aspects of his work are subject to debate.19 In the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, sentences of type 1 open the sections in Rom and Eph. The opening of the section in 1 Thess belongs to type 2, while the section in 1 Pet is opened by a παρακαλῶ sentence that lacks the typical structure, type 3. Ιt may be observed from the Euthalian material listed above that the παρακαλῶ sentence is not a necessary element of the paraenesis: It is absent in the majority of examples. This corresponds to Bjerkelund’s view that this kind of sentence does not belong to the genre of paraenesis, but is a separate epistolary formula that may introduce texts that belong to other genres as well.20 One should also note that the term παράκλησις scarcely occurs with reference to the paraenetic section of the letters.21 It is in any case clear that the meta-communicative sentence (i.e. the παρακαλῶ sentence) is not what motivates the meta-term παραίνεσις in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. The motivation may primarily be found in the exhortations themselves (i.e. the imperatival sentences and their equivalents). (e) The paraenetic sections in 1IJM
o
PQFO
XJUI
BO
JNQFSBUJWBM
TFOUFODF22 (f) Κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Phil VI distinguishes between specific and common exhortations. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι may also refer to exhortations to named individuals (Euodia and Syntyche, 4:2) in a particular situation as παραινέσεις. The beginning of this section is probably the imperatival sentence in 4:1.23 (g) As for $PM
o
von Soden was uncertain whether the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι made a new κεφάλαιον begin at Col 3:5.24 The words παραίνεσις καθάρσεως in the κεφάλαιοντίτλος seems, however, to reflect νεκρώσατε οὖν τὰ μέλη τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς (Col 3:5). (h) In κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Tit VI, the meta-term παραινεσις reflects an imperatival sentence. Here it refers to a single exhortation and not to a more extensive section of the text. (i) A special case is κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Tit III. Here, παραίνεσις does not refer to the imperative λάλει (2:1) but to the exhortations Titus should give to the community. In the pre-text, these are expressed by infinitives (2:2.4.6.9). 18

See C. J. Bjerkelund

o

19

For a criticism of his method, see B. C. Johanson

o

20

Bjerkelund (1967: 189): ‘[παρακαλῶ-] Sätze mit präpositionalem Ausdruck nehmen eine zentrale Stellung innerhalb der Briefdisposition ein und bezeichnen den Übergang zu einem neuen Abschnitt, der nicht unbedingt paränetischer Art sein muss.’

21

See below on the use of the term παράκλησις in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Philem II.

22

E. Lohmeyer

o
DPOTJEFST

UIF
CFHJOOJOH
PG
UIF
TFDUJPO
A.BIOVOH
[VS
&JOIFJU
o 
‘Es ist charakteristisch genug, das Pls. mit einer ganz allgemeinen Mahnung beginnt. U. B. Müller (2002: o
SFGFST
UP

BT
UIF
CFHJOOJOH
PG
UIF
A%FS
QBSÊOFUJTDIF
)BVQUUFJM
o 
ćJT
EFMJNJUBUJPO
corresponds exactly to the Euthalian κεφάλαιον.

23

Lohmeyer (1964: 163) describes 4:1 as ‘Überleitung’, cf. J. Holmstrand 1997: 122 and the comments in Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004: 484 (App. II, page 313).

24

See von Soden 1902: 466.

128

Commentary

(j) In κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Jas VI, the third ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος, the exhortations are described as ‘specific’ (ἰδικαί), a term that corresponds to ἴδιαι in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Phil VI. (k) In κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 1 Joh II, the first ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος, we find a paraenetic section whose opening is not marked with a imperatival sentence but instead with six more general meta-communicative clauses (γράφω ὑμῖν/ἔγραψα ὑμῖν) addressing various groups in the community. In this feature it is possible to see a connection with the paraenetic genre of the household code.25 The only imperatival sentence in the passage is 2:15, μὴ ἀγαπᾶτε τὸν κόσμον, μηδὲ τὰ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ. Still, the passage may possibly be described as paraenetic.26 (l) The description of Paul’s speech to the elders in Ephesus27 is referred to as ποιμαντικαὶ παραινέσεις. This focuses on the section o
XIFSF
1BVM
XBSOT
BHBJOTU
‘wolves’ who will not spare the flock (ποίμνιον). This warning against heretics is concluded by the imperatival clause διὸ γρηγορεῖτε (20:31). Thus the paraenesis in the pre-text is close to that in 5JU
o
TFF
I
BCPWF
ćF
Ϩϣϲрϩϟϧϭϫϰцϰϩϭ϶
TIPXT
B
TUSPOH
JOUFSFTU
in the paraenetic content of the speech and does not mention other important aspects of it, such as its concluding prayer (20:36) or its focus on the imminent martyrdom of Paul.28 (m) A different use of the term παραίνεσις is found in this κεφάλαιον-τίτλος of Acts. The term is here used with reference to a particular problem, viz. that Paul could appear as one who objected to circumcision among the Hebrews. For this reason, my translation uses ‘appeal’ for παραίνεσις in this sense. (n) Also the speech of Paul to his fellow passengers is referred to as παραίνεσις.29 The motivation for its use here is clearly the occurrence of the cognate verb in the pre-text: καὶ τὰ νῦν παραινῶ ὑμᾶς εὐθυμεῖν (27:22). In the pre-text, this meta-communicative 25

The affinity with the household code is discussed by H.-J. Klauck (1991: 136) who finds that the text cannot be identified with this genre. G. Strecker (1989: 115) points out the difference between the address of the various groups in 1 Joh and the household code, pointing out that the motive of reciprocal duties CFUXFFO
UIF
HSPVQT
PG
UIF
IPVTFIPME
JT
MBDLJOH
JO

+PI
o

26

See Strecker (1989: 113), who treats 
+PI
o
BT
B
QBSBFOFUJD
QBTTBHF
A%BTT
EJF
4àOEFOWFSHFCVOH
schon vollzogen ist und die Glaubenden auf sie wie auf das Christusereignis zurückblicken können, wird durch das Perfekt ἀφέωνται in Erinnerung gerufen. Dies unterstreicht die Verpflichtung zum ethischen 5VO
;XFJGFMMPT
MJFHU
BVG
EJFTFN
MFU[UFSFO
EFS
"L[FOU
VOTFSFT
"CTDIOJUUFT

7

Ϫу
Ћϡϟɀѩϰϣ
7
17 θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ); er ist daher der mit 1:5 beginnenden Paränese zuzuordnen.’ (p. 113).

27

According to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, Paul held the speech to the Ephesian elders in Ephesus (cf. the following κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts ΧΧΙΧ, first ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος: παράπλους Παύλου ἀπὸ Ἐφέσου ἄχρι Καισαρείας τῆς Παλαιστίνης). This error could easily arise, because when the speech is ended, Acts 21:1 says only that Paul and his companions left them and the last reference to Miletus occurs before the speech (20:17). It is worth noting that the Ἀποδημίαι Παύλου (‘The Travels of Paul’), which is also associated with the Euthalian apparatus, is more accurate regarding this: εἶτα εἰς Σάμον κἀκεῖθεν εἰς Μίλητον. Ἐκεῖθεν μεταπεμψάμενος τοὺς ἐν Ἐφέσῳ, ὡμίλησεν αὐτοῖς. ‘Then to Samos, and from there to Miletus. From there he sent for those in Ephesus, and he spoke to them.’ Text in von Soden 1902: 368.

28
ćJT
UIFNF
JT
DFOUSBM
UP
UIF
TQFFDI
DG
o
BOE
JT
FNQIBTJ[FE
BMTP
JO
UIF
EFTDSJQUJPO
PG
UIF
GBSFXFMM
TDFOF
o 
J. Jervell (1998: 509) emphasizes that this speech is the only ‘farewell address’ (Abschiedsrede) in Acts. Similarly, Pervo (2009: 518) points out that analyses of the form and structure of the speech show the dominance of the Jewish ‘testament’, referring to the speech as mainly deliberative but with apologetic and epideictic elements. 29

This description is used also by Jervell (1998: 607), paraphrasing the pre-text: ‘Er ermahnt sie jetzt, καὶ τὰ νῦν, guten Mutes zu sein.’ Pervo (2009: 661) notes that the core of the speech is formed by a (Jewish) PSBDMF
PG
BTTVSBODF
WW
o
UIBU
IBT
CFFO
)FMMFOJ[FE
GPS
UIF
TBLF
PG
UIF
SFBEFST

Commentary on the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι

129

sentence has a counterpart in διὸ εὐθυμεῖτε, ἄνδρες (27:25). The use of the term in this κεφάλαιον-τίτλος is the only instance where it reflects the cognate verb in the pre-text. Summation One may observe from the list above that παραίνεσις in the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι in most instances refer to sections of the letters that biblical scholars also would refer to as ‘paraenetic’. This observation was made by Dahl in his study of the apparatus and developed further in the study of the meta-term by Hellholm and myself.30 A corresponding use of the term for general moral exhortation is found in the commentaries of Theodoret on the Pauline letters.31 The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι describe the exhortations in the letters mostly as general and unrelated to any particular situation.32 This is clear from the description of their content: ‘about virtue’, ‘about unifying love’ etc. One possible exception may be found in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Phil VI. The use of the term in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts is restricted. In the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts, the term is used twice for speeches XJUI
B
DPOUFOU
UIBU
JT
WFSZ
NVDI
DPOEJUJPOFE
CZ
UIF
QBSUJDVMBS
DPOUFYU
NoO 
ćJT
JT
not unexpected in a narrative text. One should therefore note that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts is evidence that the use of the term in the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is diverse. 1.4.2. ΠΑΡΑΚΛΗΣΙΣ a) 2 Thess IV: Exhortation (παράκλησις) to pray for him and his work. In this: Prayer for them to obtain the love of God. Pre-text (
ćFTT
o 

ϰч
ϩϭϧɀчϫ
ɀϮϭϯϣъϳϣϯϦϣ
ЋϢϣϩϲϭц
ɀϣϮх
КϪҀϫ b) Philem II: Commendment (σύστασις) of Onesimus, a runaway slave, and an appeal (παρακλησις) for him, since he has been saved by faith. Pre-text (1IJMFN
o

ɀϟϮϟϨϟϩҀ
ϯϣ
ɀϣϮх
ϰϭѼ
ГϪϭѼ
ϰтϨϫϭϱ c) Heb VII, second ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος: Admonition (παράκλησις) with praise. Pre-text ()FC
o 

ɀϣɀϣцϯϪϣϦϟ
Ϣс
ɀϣϮх
аϪҀϫ
Ћϡϟɀϥϰϭц Annotations In κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 2 Thess IV, the term παράκλησις represents an imperatival sentence. Thus, the use of the term here seems close to the use of the related term παραίνεσις above: In κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Col IX, παραίνεσις καθάρσεως apparently reflects the imperatival sentence νεκρώσατε οὖν τὰ μέλη κτλ in the pre-text (Col 3:5). Κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Philem II is a special case. This is the only instance in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι where the metacommunicative verb παρακαλῶ (Philem 1:10) is reflected by the corresponding noun 30

See Dahl 2000d: 265. Cf. the texts referred to by %JCFMJVT
JO
IJT
DPNNFOUBSZ
PO
+BNFT

ćFTT
o
Č
(BM
Č
3PN
o
$PM
o
4FF
M. Dibelius/H. Greeven 1964: 15). It should be noted that his description of 
ćFTT
o
DPSSFTQPOET
FYBDUMZ
UP
UIF
&VUIBMJBO
Ϩϣϲрϩϟϧϭϫϰцϰϩϭ϶
4FF
BMTP
UIF
NBUFSJBM
from a great number of modern commentators in Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004, passim.

31

See Theodoret (ὑπόθεσις of Eph, PG 82: 508D): Τῆς δὲ Ἐπιστολῆς τὰ μὲν πρῶτα περιέχει διδασκαλίαν τοῦ θείου κηρύγματος, τὰ δὲ τελευταῖα παραίνεσιν ἠθικήν. ‘The first part of the letter contains teaching of the divine message; the second part, ethical paraenesis.’ See Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004: 479 (App. II, page 309).

32

The difficult question whether or not this description of the pre-texts is valid is outside the scope of the present commentary.

130

Commentary

παράκλησις. One could argue on the basis on the first two instances that the κεφάλαιατίτλοι use παράκλησις when there is no moral exhortation. But the use of the term in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Heb VII represents a problem for this explanation. The exhortations in this passage could with the same right be labeled παραίνεσις.33 For some reason, the ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος avoids the term here, and uses παράκλησις instead. Two explanations may be considered: (1) The reason for the choice of the term παράκλησις may be that the exhortation in this passage was perceived to differ from the paraenetic genre.34 The exhortation is expressed through the verb ἐπιθυμέω: ἐπιθυμοῦμεν … ἕκαστον ὑμῶν τὴν αὐτὴν ἐνδείκνυσθαι σπουδήν, a verb that is not used in indirect exhortation in other paraenetic texts in the NT. (2) Another possible explanation is the use of the term παράκλησις in the passage that immediately follows (o 
ćJT
QBTTBHF
JT
DMPTFMZ
linked to the preceding through the particle γάρ (6:13) and contains the final clause ἵνα … παράκλησιν ἔχωμεν (6:18). According to Weiss, this final clause expresses the purpose of the entire context from 6:13 onward.35 The final clause in 6:18 makes clear that the παράκλησις has a secure foundation in δύο πράγματα, the promise and oath of God. The author of the ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος has apparently perceived the close connection between UIF
FYIPSUBUJPO
JO
o
BOE
JUT
NPUJWBUJPO
JO
o
BOE
VTFE
UIF
NFUBUFSN
GSPN
UIF
pre-text in the ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος.36 Summation The use of the term παράκλησις in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is related to the imperatival passages. The term seems however to have been replaced by the term παραίνεσις in most instances to describe moral exhortation. The use of παράκλησις in the second ὑποδιαίρεσιςτίτλος of Heb VII seems to be derived from the genre-designation used in the pre-text itself. 1.4.3. ΕΥΧΑΡΙΣΤΙΑ a) Phil I: Thanksgiving for the virtue of the Philippians, and prayer for their perfection. Pre-text (1IJM
o 

ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰҀ
ϰҁ
Ϧϣҁ
Ϫϭϱ 33

See e.g. O. Michel (1966: 247), who describes the text beginning in 6:9 and ending in 6:20 as paraenesis.

34

H.-F. Weiss

o


IBT
NBEF
B
TJNJMBS
DIPJDF
BT
UIBU
NBEF
JO
UIF
аɀϭϢϧϟцϮϣϯϧ϶ϰцϰϩϭ϶
Weiss SFGFST
UP
UIF
JNNFEJBUFMZ
QSFDFEJOH
WFSTFT
o
BT
A(FSJDIUTQBSÊOFTF
CVU
EPFT
OPU
VTF
UIF
UFSN
AQBSBFOFTJT
GPS
o

UIF
&VUIBMJBO
аɀϭϢϧϟцϮϣϯϧ϶ 
)F
QPJOUT
PVU
UIBU
o
EJČFST
GSPN
UIF
QSFDFEJOH
passage both in form and content. The author of Heb turns from ‘Gerichtsparänese’ to a ‘seelsorgerlich wirkendes Zureden’ (p. 353). See also the comments of W. Übelacker (2004: 338) quoted below.

35

Weiss (1991: 363): ‘[D]er Finalsatz V.18 [ist] Zielaussage des ganzen Zusammenhangs von V.13 an’.

36

Cf. the designation λόγος τῆς παρακλήσεως in Heb 13:22, which probably refers to the entire letter. It has been noted that it is no coincidence that this term occurs also in 6:18, see Weiss (1991: 363). On Heb as λόγος τῆς παρακλήσεως, see Übelacker

o 
3FHBSEJOH
UIF
DIPJDF
CFUXFFO
UIF
terms παράκλησις and παραίνεσις, Übelacker (2004: 338) seems to be in agreement with the Euthalian ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος: ‘Here [in 6:18] the author [of Heb] uses the word παράκλησις (and not παραίνεσις), which I think has connotations of both comfort and encouragement here; a double connotation that παραίνεσις just does not have.’ Even if there is an agreement as far as the use of the term is concerned, this does of course not imply that the term has the same meaning for the ancient and the modern scholar. Whether παράκλησις has the connotation of comfort or not in this ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος is uncertain. The use of the term in the two other instances (κεφάλαια-τίτλοι 2 Thess IV; Philem II) does however not support this assumption.

Commentary on the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι

131

b) Col I: Thanksgiving for the Colossians, who have been made God’s own in hope. Pre-text ($PM
o 

ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰϭѼϪϣϫ
ϰҁ
Ϧϣҁ c) Philem I: Praise of Philemon, and thanksgiving for him. Pre-text (1IJMFN
o 

ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰҀ
ϰҁ
Ϧϣҁ
Ϫϭϱ d) 2 Thess I: Thanksgiving for the faith of the Thessalonians, their love and their steadfastness, for the sake of their honor and the punishment of their persecutors. And prayer for their glorious perfection, to the glory of Christ. Pre-text (
ćFTT
o 

ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰϣѴϫ
ЩϲϣцϩϭϪϣϫ
ϰҁ
Ϧϣҁ
ɀрϫϰϭϰϣ
ɀϣϮх
аϪҀϫ e) 2 Thess III: Thanksgiving for the call. Pre-text (
ćFTT
o 

КϪϣѴ϶
Ϣс
ЩϲϣцϩϭϪϣϫ
ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰϣѴϫ
ϰҁ
Ϧϣҁ
ɀрϫϰϭϰϣ
ɀϣϮх
ὑμῶν f) 2 Cor I: Thanksgiving (εὐχαριστία) for the aid of God, in which he says he has confided. Pre text (
$PS
o 

͆Яϩϭϡϥϰч϶
Ъ
Ϧϣч϶ g) 3 Joh I: Prayer for perfection, and thanksgiving for the testimony of the brethren to [his] hospitality through Christ. Pre-text (
+PI
o 

ͳϡϟɀϥϰт


ГϳрϮϥϫ
ϡпϮ
ϩцϟϫ
ГϮϳϭϪтϫϵϫ
ЋϢϣϩϲҀϫ
καὶ μαρτυρούντων σου τῇ ἀληθείᾳ, καθὼς σὺ ἐν ἀληθείᾳ περιπατεῖς. h) Col II: Prayer on their behalf for prudent behavior, for strength to endure, with thanksgiving for being made God’s own in purification. Pre-text ($PM
o 

Ϣϧп
ϰϭѼϰϭ
Ϩϟх
КϪϣѴ϶


ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰϭѼϫϰϣ϶
ϰҁ
ɀϟϰϮх
ϰҁ
ἱκανώσαντι ὑμᾶς εἰς τὴν μερίδα τοῦ κλήρου τῶν ἁγίων ἐν τῷ φωτί i) Acts IV, ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος III: Thanksgiving from the Church for the faithful strength of the apostles. Pre-text ("DUT
o 

ϭТ
Ϣс
ЋϨϭъϯϟϫϰϣ϶
ЪϪϭϦϱϪϟϢчϫ
ПϮϟϫ
ϲϵϫуϫ
ɀϮч϶
ϰчϫ
θεὸν καὶ εἶπαν The verb εὐχαριστέω is not found in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. This probably reflects the style of a genre that prefers nominal meta-terms, as opposed to the style of the genre ὑπόθεσις. Another possible reason for the verb being avoided is the influence of Atticism.37 The ancient handbooks are divided: Phrynichus condemns the verb εὐχαριστέω as non-Attic, while Pollux lists it as an alternative way of saying χάριν οἶδα ‘I am grateful’.38 The verb regularly marks the opening of the thanksgiving sections in the Pauline letters.39 This is 37

Note that Theodoret does not seem to be influenced by the Atticists at this point, since he uses the verb εὐχαριστεῖν, see note 35 below.

38

Phrynichus (Ecloga, 10): Εὐχαριστεῖν οὐδεὶς τῶν δοκίμων εἶπεν, ἀλλὰ χάριν εἰδέναι. ‘No one of the approved authors said εὐχαριστεῖν, but [they said] χάριν εἰδέναι’. But cf. Pollux (Onomasticon V, 141): Καὶ τὸ εὐχαριστεῖν ἐπὶ τοῦ διδόναι χάριν, οὐκ ἐπὶ τοῦ εἰδέναι. ‘And εὐχαριστεῖν for διδόναι χάριν [= to give thanks] not for εἰδέναι [= to be thankful]’. There seems here to be two different understandings of εὐχαριστῶ. Without explicitly saying it, Pollux seems to be correcting the opinion that is found in Phrynichus regarding the meaning of the word.

39

On the thanksgivings in the Pauline letters, see below in the comments on the ὑπόθεσις of Rom.

132

Commentary

clearly reflected in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, where most of the occurrences are found in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of these letters. There are only two other instances (3 Joh and Acts). Annotations BoE
*O
UIFTF
JOTUBODFT
ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰцϟ
JT
VTFE
GPS
UIF
UIBOLTHJWJOH
TFDUJPO
JO
UIF
CFHJOOJOH
of the letter. The noun replaces the verb εὐχαριστέω, which is used in the pre-text. The shift from verb to noun leads to the omission of adverbial particles: The verb is regularly modified with πάντοτε in the pre-texts (Phil 1:4; Col 1:3; Philem 1:4; 2 Thess 1:3) and this is not reflected in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. Thus, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι use the meta-term εὐχαριστία as a pure text-deicticon.40 The thanksgiving is identified with the pre-text.41 It should be noted that the εὐχαριστία in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Philem I is used together with another meta-term, ‘praise’ (ἔπαινος).42 F
ćJT
Ϩϣϲрϩϟϧϭϫϰцϰϩϭ϶
JT
DMPTFMZ
SFMBUFE
UP
UIF
ĕSTU
HSPVQ
BoE 
ćF
VTF
PG
UIF
meta-term again reflects the verb εὐχαριστέω in the pre-text. What separates this instance from those in the former group, is that this κεφάλαιον is not in the beginning of the letter. It has been noted by modern commentators that 2 Thess has two thanksgiving sections43 and this observation was also made in the Euthalian list. (f) 2 Cor is a special case, since in this letter we find an opening benediction (εὐλογητὸς ὁ θεός 1:3) with a reference to thanksgiving (εὐχαριστήθη) placed near the end of the section (εὐχαριστήθη 1:11).44 If we ask which of the two the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος here depends on, we find that the question is difficult to answer. The following may clarify the problem: (a) The contents of the thanksgiving in the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος is clearly a reworking of o
ćF
WFSCT
ГϮъϯϟϰϭ
BOE
ѻъϯϣϰϟϧ
JO
UIF
QSFUFYU

JT
USBOTGPSNFE
into the noun βοήθεια. The verb ἠλπίκαμεν in the pre-text is paraphrased by πεποιθέναι ϲϥϯϧϫ
VTJOH
UIF
TBNF
WFSC
BT
UIF
QSFUFYU
JO

C
&WFO
JG
o
JT
QSFDFEJOH
UIF
verb εὐχαριστήθη in 1:11, εὐχαριστήθη can hardly be paraphrased with εὐχαριστία in the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος: The agent of εὐχαριστήθη is not Paul, but other believers.45 Therefore, this act of thanksgiving (referred to in a purpose clause) cannot be considered as being 40

An obvious exception is κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Col IX: παραίνεσις … εὐχαριστίας.

41

The designation εὐχαριστία is of course not restricted to the Euthalian apparatus. See e.g. Theodoret (Commentary, PG 82: 658C) on 2 Thess 1:3. In his comment on 1 Thess 1:2, he points out that Paul here follows a universal pattern of behavior (Commentary, PG 82: 629B): Διδασκόμεθα πρῶτον εὐχαριστεῖν ὑπὲρ τῶν προϋπηργμένων ἡμῖν ἀγαθῶν, εἶθ᾽ οὕτως αἰτεῖν τὰ ἐλλείποντα. Τοῦτο γὰρ ἔστιν εὑρεῖν πανταχοῦ τὸν θεῖον Ἀπόστολον. ‘We are taught first to give thanks for the benefits that have already come to us, then to ask for those things which we do not have. And you will find that the divine Apostle does this everywhere.’

42

The association between thanksgiving and praise is also reflected in the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις (cf. their use of the verb ἀποδέχομαι to describe the thanksgiving sections). There is thus a related idea in these sections of the apparatus although the terminology is different. That the thanksgivings could be perceived as praise was also observed by Theodoret (Commentary, PG 82: 658C) commenting on 2 Thess: Πάλιν τῇ εὐχαριστίᾳ σχηματίζει τὴν εὐφημίαν. ‘Again, he gives his praise the form of the thanksgiving.’

43

So W. Trilling (1980: 118): ‘Zunächst ist die Tatsache einer zweiten Danksagung im gleichen Brief zu erwähnen. Dies ist nur noch in 1Thess 2,13 der Fall und stellt eine Besonderheit dieses Briefes dar.’ A second thanksgiving occurs both in 1 Thess 2:13 and in 2 Thess 2:13.

44

W. G. Doty (1973: 33) says that the opening statement of 2 Cor is framed by blessing and thanksgiving at the beginning and the end, cf. V. Furnish (1984: 116), quoted in the note below.

45

See the comments in H. Windisch (1924: 49), who is inclined to consider εὐχαριστήθη a thanksgiving for the salvation from dangers in the past. He argues that 1:11a, on the other hand, may refer to intercession (δέησις) for Paul in his present situation.

Commentary on the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι

133

performed by Paul as he writes the letter.46 If we believe the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος to be accurate, the most satisfactory solution is to consider the benediction εὐλογητὸς ὁ θεός (1:3) the equivalent of the verb εὐχαριστέω. The benediction may be considered as marking the entire section as a thanksgiving. (g) In κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 3 Joh I, εὐχαριστία occurs together with εὐχή (see below). From the paraphrase, it is clear that the term εὐχαριστία in the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος replaces the sentence beginning ἐχάρην γὰρ λίαν ‘I was extremely happy’ (1:3). The reason for his happiness is the report of the hospitality of Gaius. The words ἐχάρην γὰρ λίαν do not represent a thanksgiving in a strict sense, but is rather a (conventional) expression of joy.47 This expression of joy is, however, not far from a more explicit thanksgiving. Both have the function of a captatio benevolentiae.48 This may be the motivation for the use of ευχαριστια in the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος. (h) In κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Col II, the term εὐχαριστία occurs again together with εὐχή. Here the term εὐχαριστία reflects the participle εὐχαριστοῦντες in the pre-text. The κεφάλαιον-τίτλος apparently understands Paul and his co-writers as the subject of the participle.49 The edition of von Soden makes a new κεφάλαιον (III) begin at 1:14. It seems however that κεφάλαιον II also included Col 1:14, as the phrase ἐν καθάρσει seems to paraphrase ἐν ᾧ ἔχομεν τὴν ἀπολύτρωσιν, τὴν ἄφεσιν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν (1:14).50 (i) The only instance in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts seems to be quite different. In the pre-text, the verb εὐχαριστέω does not occur. There are two possible motivations for the use of the term εὐχαριστία in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts IV: (1) The pre-text contains a meta-communicative phrase in the form δεηθέντων αὐτῶν, thus referring to the preceding as ‘petition’ or ‘prayer’. Commentators have also referred to this text as a prayer51 and the term εὐχαριστία may be used in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts in a sense that is close to εὐχή. (2) The term εὐχαριστία is used with reference to a thanksgiving for the release of the apostles from the Jewish authorities. In that case, the ‘faithful strength of the apostles’ is not the object of a prayer, but the object of a thanksgiving, referring to the strength they showed before the Council.52

46

See Furnish (1984: 116): ‘The eucharisto-clause concludes rather than opens the paragraph, and it has reference to the hoped-for thanksgiving of the addressees rather than the present thanksgiving of Paul himself.’

47

See R. Bultmann (1967: 97): ‘Auch das jetzt V. 3 mit dem Ausdruck der Freude beginnt (wie 2 Joh 4), entspricht der Tradition des Briefstils’ with a reference to Bauer, s. v. χαίρω 2.

48

This is pointed out by Klauck (1992: 44), who also notes that the linguistic expressions are quite similar: ‘εὐ-χαριστ-εῖν [ist] mit χάρις wurzelverwandt (vgl auch die Freudenäusserungen in Phil 4,10; Phlm 7). Jedenfalls hat V. 4 [= 2 Joh 1:4] ähnlich den Danksagungen bei Paulus auch die Aufgabe einer captatio benevolentiae.’ Klauck


DPNNFOUT
PO

+PI
o
JO
B
TJNJMBS
GBTIJPO

49

On different interpretations of this passage in the pre-text, see the comments below on the ὑπόθεσις of Col.

50

Zacagni (1698: 650 = PG 85: 767C) following the codices Palatinus and Cryptoferratensis, makes the third κεφαλοιον of Col begin with 1:14 but notes that in another codex, the κεφάλαιον begins with 1:16.

51

On this interpretation of the pre-text, see E. Haenchen




XIP
SFGFST
UP
o
BT
A%BT
(FCFU
der Gemeinde und seine Erhöhrung’, cf. Jervell (1998: 183) ‘Das Gebet der Gemeinde’.

52

Cf. Pervo (2009: 120), who refers to the text as ‘Prayerful Celebration’. The interpretation of Pervo is close to the Euthalian κεφάλαιον-τίτλος.

134

Commentary

Summation The general impression is that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is evidence of an analysis of the letters that anticipates modern form-critical analysis. This is based on the fact that the list reserves the term mostly for the opening thanksgiving section of the letter. The terminology is, however, not consistent. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι do not mention explicitly the thanksgiving sections in Rom and 1 Cor, but apparently include them in the προοίμιον. The contents of the προοίμιον has no particular interest in itself, only what comes ‘after the prooemium’ (μετὰ τὸ προοίμιον) is referred to. Thus, the thanksgiving section of the letter is actually omitted from the analysis of Rom and 1 Cor, while it is included elsewhere. It is also worth noting that the thanksgivings in 1 Thess are referred to with the term ἔπαινος. Here content rather than form is emphasized. The term εὐχαριστία is used only once in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Catholic letters (3 Joh) but this reflects the fact that the Catholic letters in general do not have this feature. The use of the term in the list for Acts is a special case. This may be explained on the basis of the different genre of the pre-text (Acts), and it does not necessarily imply that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts are based on a different type of analysis. 1.4.4. ΕΥΧΗ a) 1 Thess III: Prayer to God and Christ for his own arrival and for progress and strengthening of the Thessalonians until the coming of Christ. Pre-text (
ćFTT
o 

ϟЯϰч϶
Ϣс
Ъ
Ϧϣч϶
Ϩϟх
ɀϟϰуϮ
КϪҀϫ
Ϩϟх
Ъ
ϨъϮϧϭ϶
КϪҀϫ
Ἰησοῦς κατευθύναι τὴν ὁδὸν ἡμῶν πρὸς ὑμᾶς· […] (12) ὁ κύριος πλεονάσαι καὶ περισσεύσαι […] (13) εἰς τὸ στηρίξαι ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας b) 1 Thess VII: Prayer for sanctification of spirit, soul and body. Pre-text (
ćFTT
 

ϟЯϰч϶
Ϣс
Ъ
Ϧϣч϶
ϰѮ϶
ϣСϮфϫϥ϶
Ќϡϧрϯϟϧ
аϪѩ϶
ЪϩϭϰϣϩϣѴ϶
Ϩϟх
ὁλόκληρον ὑμῶν τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἡ ψυχὴ καὶ τὸ σῶμα ἀμέμπτως ἐν τῇ παρουσίᾳ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τηρηθείη c) 2 Thess III, ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος II: Prayer to God and Christ for their sustenance. Pre-text (
ćFTT
o 

ϟЯϰч϶
Ϣс
Ъ
ϨъϮϧϭ϶
КϪҀϫ
ΚϥϯϭѼ϶
͗Ϯϧϯϰч϶
Ϩϟх
Ϧϣч϶
Ъ
πατὴρ ἡμῶν, […] (17) παρακαλέσαι ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας καὶ στηρίξαι ἐν παντὶ ἔργῳ καὶ λόγῳ ἀγαθῷ d) 2 Thess IV, ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος Ι: Prayer for them to obtain the love of God. Pre-text (
ćFTT
 

Ъ
Ϣс
ϨъϮϧϭ϶
ϨϟϰϣϱϦъϫϟϧ
аϪҀϫ
ϰп϶
ϨϟϮϢцϟ϶
ϣС϶
ϰуϫ
Ћϡрɀϥϫ
τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ εἰς τὴν ὑπομονὴν τοῦ Χριστοῦ e) 2 Thess VI: Prayer for peace from God. Pre-text (2 Thess 3:16): αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ κύριος τῆς εἰρήνης δῴη ὑμῖν τὴν εἰρήνην διὰ παντὸς ἐν παντὶ τρόπῳ. ὁ κύριος μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν f) Heb XXII: Prayer to God for his rule and guidance to virtue. Pre-text ()FC
o 

Ъ
Ϣс
Ϧϣч϶
ϰѮ϶
ϣСϮфϫϥ϶


ϨϟϰϟϮϰцϯϟϧ
аϪѩ϶
Гϫ
παντὶ ἀγαθῷ εἰς τὸ ποιῆσαι τὸ θέλημα […] ᾧ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας· ἀμήν g) 1 Pet VIII: Prayer for the perfection of the believers.

Commentary on the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι

135

Pre-text (
1FU
o 
Ъ
Ϣс
Ϧϣч϶
ɀрϯϥ϶
ϳрϮϧϰϭ϶

ϨϟϰϟϮϰцϯϣϧ
ϨϟϰϟϮϰцϯϟϧ
Byz), στηρίξει, σθενώσει, θεμελιώσει (11) αὐτῷ τὸ κράτος (δόξα Byz) εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας ἀμήν h) Eph II: Prayer for understanding of the benefits brought to us in Christ. Pre-text (&QI
o 

Ϣϧп
ϰϭѼϰϭ


ϭЯ
ɀϟъϭϪϟϧ
ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰҀϫ
аɀсϮ
аϪҀϫ
μνείαν ποιούμενος ἐπὶ τῶν προσευχῶν μου (17) ἵνα ὁ θεὸς […] δώῃ ὑμῖν πνεῦμα σοφίας καὶ ἀποκαλύψεως ἐν ἐπιγνώσει αὐτοῦ i) Eph V: Prayer on behalf of the Church for the power and love of God. Pre-text (&QI
o 

ϰϭъϰϭϱ
ϳрϮϧϫ
ϨрϪɀϰϵ
ϰп
ϡшϫϟϰр
Ϫϭϱ
ɀϮч϶
ϰчϫ
ɀϟϰтϮϟ
[…] (16) ἵνα δῷ ὑμῖν κατὰ τὸ πλοῦτος τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ δυνάμει κραταιωθῆναι j) Phil I: Thanksgiving for the virtue of the Philippians, and prayer for their perfection. Pre-text (1IJM
o 

ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰҀ
ϰҁ
Ϧϣҁ
Ϫϭϱ


Ϩϟх
ϰϭѼϰϭ
ɀϮϭϯϣъϳϭϪϟϧ k) Col II: Prayer on their behalf for prudent behavior, for strength to endure, with thanksgiving for being made God’s own in purification. Pre-text ($PM
o 

Ϣϧп
ϰϭѼϰϭ
Ϩϟх
КϪϣѴ϶
Ћϲ‫
ڍ‬Р϶
КϪтϮϟ϶
ЙϨϭъϯϟϪϣϫ
ϭЯ
παυόμεθα ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν προσευχόμενοι καὶ αἰτούμενοι ἵνα πληρωθῆτε τὴν ἐπίγνωσιν τοῦ θελήματος αὐτοῦ l) 2 Thess I: Thanksgiving for the faith of the Thessalonians, their love and their steadfastness, for the sake of their honor and the punishment of their persecutors. And prayer for their glorious perfection, to the glory of Christ. Pre-text (
ćFTT
o 

ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰϣѴϫ
ЩϲϣцϩϭϪϣϫ
ϰҁ
Ϧϣҁ
ɀрϫϰϭϰϣ
ɀϣϮх
аϪҀϫ
(11) εἰς ὃ καὶ προσευχόμεθα πάντοτε περὶ ὑμῶν, ἵνα ὑμᾶς ἀξιώσῃ τῆς κλήσεως ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν […] (12) ὅπως ἐνδοξασθῇ τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ ἐν ὑμῖν, καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐν αὐτῷ m) 3 Joh I Prayer for perfection, and thanksgiving for the testimony of the brethren to [his] hospitality through Christ. Pre-text (
+PI
o 

Ћϡϟɀϥϰт
ɀϣϮх
ɀрϫϰϵϫ
ϣгϳϭϪϟц
ϯϣ
ϣЯϭϢϭѼϯϦϟϧ
Ϩϟх
ὑγιαίνειν, καθὼς εὐοδοῦταί σου ἡ ψυχή n) Jude IV: Prayer for their sanctification and pure assurance, with praise (δοξολογία) of God. Pre-text (+VEF
o 

ϰҁ
Ϣс
ϢϱϫϟϪтϫѾ
ϲϱϩрϬϟϧ
аϪѩ϶
Ћɀϰϟцϯϰϭϱ϶
Ϩϟх
ϯϰѮϯϟϧ
κατενώπιον τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ ἀμώμους ἐν ἀγαλλιάσει μόνῳ θεῷ σωτῆρι ἡμῶν διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν δόξα μεγαλωσύνη κράτος καὶ ἐξουσία πρὸ παντὸς τοῦ αἰῶνος καὶ νῦν καὶ εἰς πάντας τοὺς αἰῶνας· ἀμήν On the lexical level, one should note that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι always use the form εὐχή and not προσευχή, which is the regular form in the NT.53 This may be considered a stylistic change.54 When all the pre-texts are examined, two main types emerge. The first is NBSLFE
BT
B
QSBZFS
JO
UIF
QSFUFYU
UISPVHI
UIF
VTF
PG
UIF
PQUBUJWF
NPPE
BoH


UIF
TFDPOE
53

In the NT, the term εὐχή is used only once with the meaning ‘prayer’ (Jas 5:15, see Bauer, s. v.)

54

Pollux (Onomasticon V, 130) does not include προσευχή/προσεύχομαι. He includes ἐπεύχεσθαι and συνεύχεσθαι but gives εὐχή as the corresponding noun.

136

Commentary

does as a rule not use the optative, but has the meta-communicative verb προσεύχομαι or its equivalent. Annotations BoH 
*O
BMM
UIFTF
JOTUBODFT
UIF
QSBZFS
IBT
(PE
PS
(PE
BOE
$ISJTU
BT
UIF
TVCKFDU
PG
UIF
optative. In 1 Pet 5:10 (g), both the indicative and the optative is found in the manuscripts. The designation εὐχή in the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος suggests, however, that the list was made on the basis of a pre-text with the optative.55 It is here worth noting the connection between the analysis of the apparatus and the Greek terminology. The Greek grammarians referred to the optative as ἔγκλισις εὐκτική (‘wishing mood’). One should note that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι never use the designation εὐχή for an optative that has to be supplied, e.g. for the benediction at the letter endings. IoM
*O
UIF
TFDPOE
HSPVQ
UIF
WFSC
ɀϮϭϯϣъϳϭϪϟϧ
PDDVST
JO
UIF
QSFTFOU
UFOTF
CVU
XJUIout any special reference to the time of writing. The prayer itself is referred to with a purpose clause. (m) The use of εὐχή in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 3 Joh I seems to be suggested by the verb εὔχομαι in the pre-text (1:2). (n) The use of εὐχή for the concluding verses of Jude is a special case. The modern form-critical analysis would refer to this text primarily as a doxology.56 The Euthalian κεφάλαιον-τίτλος also uses the term δοξολογία but apparently considers the text primarily a prayer (εὐχή…σὺν δοξολογίᾳ). Reasonably, the praise of God as the one who has the power to sanctify (δυναμένῳ … στῆσαι κτλ) is interpreted as an implicit prayer to God for the use of this power.57 Another possibility is that the language of the pre-text has been misunderstood and that the infinitives φυλάξαι and στῆσαι have been taken as optatives. This would place this κεφάλαιον-τίτλος in the first group referred to above. Summation The general impression is that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι with regard to the meta-term εὐχή are based on a consistent analysis of the pre-text: The motivation for using the term is on the one hand the use of mood (optative) and the use of a meta-communicative verb (προσεύχομαι) on the other. 1.4.5. ΕΠΑΝΑΛΗΨΙΣ a) Rom VIII: Repetition (ἐπανάληψις) about life in grace. Pre-text (3PN
o 

Л
ЋϡϫϭϣѴϰϣ
ЋϢϣϩϲϭц
ϡϧϫьϯϨϭϱϯϧϫ
ϡпϮ
ϫшϪϭϫ
ϩϟϩҀ b) Rom XII: Repetition about the glory that lies in store for the saints. Pre-text (3PN
o 
< λογίζομαι γὰρ ὅτι οὐκ ἄξια τὰ παθήματα τοῦ νῦν καιροῦ πρὸς τὴν μέλλουσαν δόξαν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι εἰς ἡμᾶς 55

Cf. P. J. Achtemeier

o 
AćF
GVUVSF
JOEJDBUJWF
GPSN
PG
UIF
WFSCT
HJWFT
UIFN
UIF
DIBSBDUFS
PG
promises, rather than of intercessions by or wishes from the author; the latter would require the optative mode.’

56

See H. Paulsen (1992: 86), who refers to the verses as the doxology of the letter.

57

A similar description of the ending of Jude is found in Theophylact (Commentary, PG 126: 104C): Ταῦτα δὲ εἰπὼν, εὐχῇ λοιπὸν ἐπισφραγίζεται τὴν Ἐπιστολήν. ‘Having said this, he now seals the letter with a prayer.’

Commentary on the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι

137

c) 2 Pet IV: Repetition about the wickedness of the heretics. Pre-text (
1FU
o 

ϰϟъϰϥϫ
НϢϥ
Ћϡϟɀϥϰϭц
ϢϣϱϰтϮϟϫ
аϪѴϫ
ϡϮрϲϵ
Гɀϧϯϰϭϩфϫ d) Acts XV, ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος II: Repetition of what the angel declared and what he instructed Cornelius. Pre text ("DUT
o 

Ϩϟх
Ъ
͋ϭϮϫфϩϧϭ϶
Зϲϥ The use of the term ἐπανάληψις was identified by Robinson as a characteristic feature in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι as it occurs in the lists of all three sections (Acts, Catholic letters, Pauline letters). According to Robinson, the presence of this term shows that all sections are close in style and probably the work of one author.58 It remains to examine how the term is used in the different sections. As a name of a rhetorical figure, ἐπανάληψις usually refers to the repetition of a word or word group. The term is often reserved for the repetition of several words at the beginning of a sentence.59 This kind of repetition is not found in the present pre-text. Annotations (a) The κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Rom VIII use the term at another level, designating the repetition or resumption of a theme. The theme of ‘life in grace’ is treated in the immediately preceding text, although it is impossible to say exactly what the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος refers to. Since the list treats o
BT
POF
Ϩϣϲрϩϟϧϭϫ
JU
JT
QPTTJCMF
UIBU
UIF
BVUIPS
IBE
UIJT
text in mind.60 The composition of the pre-text may throw light on the use of the term ἐπανάληψις. In his rhetorical analysis of Rom, Johannes Weiss observed that the end of o
JT
DMFBSMZ
NBSLFE
CZ
BO
BOUJUIFUJDBM
DPODMVTJPO
XJUI
B
ĕOBM
clausula (6:23):61 Τὰ γὰρ ὀψώνια τῆς ἁμαρτίας θάνατος Τὸ δὲ χάρισμα τοῦ θεοῦ ζωὴ αἰώνιος Ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ ἡμῶν This emphatic ending may explain the use of the term ἐπανάληψις in the κεφάλαιοντίτλος Rom VIII: It refers to the resumption of a theme that has seemingly been concluded. (b) A similar use of the term ἐπανάληψις is found here. The opening verse of the pre-text (8:18) refers back to 8:17 (cf. the particle γάρ). There are also an affinity in language between v. 18 and 17: (1) The phrase παθήματα τοῦ νῦν καιροῦ (8:18) resumes συμπάσχομεν (8:17) and (2) the phrase τὴν μέλλουσαν δόξαν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι εἰς ἡμᾶς (8:18) resumes ἵνα καὶ συνδοξασθῶμεν (8:17). At the same time, there is also a strongly marked division between the two verses since v. 17 is clearly the end of the section.

58

Robinson (1895: 25) quotes the following κεφάλαια-τίτλοι: Rom VIII and XII; Acts XV, second ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος and 2 Pet IV.

59

See the material in H. Lausberg

ff
o

60

Cf. Hellholm

o
XIP
EJWJEFT
o
JOUP
UXP
QFSJDPQFT
oo 
ćJT
EJWJTJPO
JT
adopted by Lohse

o
BOE
R. Jewett

o


Jewett referring to them as ‘Diatribe BOE
&OUIZNFNFT
$PODFSOJOH
UIF
%FBUI
PG
UIF
4JOGVM
4FMG
BOE
UIF
/FX
-JGF
JO
$ISJTU
o
BOE
A%JBUSJCF
$PODFSOJOH
-JWJOH
UP
(PE
VOEFS
UIF
(SBDF
BOE
-PSETIJQ
PG
$ISJTU
o 


61

For the arrangement of the text, see J. Weiss 1897: 189, n. 1. Cf. the analysis in Hellholm (1997: 389) and the commentary in Jewett

o 

138

Commentary

The end is marked with the climax:62 εἰ δὲ τέκνα, καὶ κληρονόμοι· κληρονόμοι μὲν θεοῦ, συνκληρονόμοι δὲ Χριστοῦ, εἴπερ συμπάσχομεν ἵνα καὶ συνδοξασθῶμεν. (c) Again, in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 2 Pet IV, the term ἐπανάληψις refers to the repetition of a theme. The preceding κεφάλαιον-τίτλος (2 Pet III) has πρόῤῥησις ἀπατηλῆς ἐπαναστάσεως αἱρετικῶν, ἀσεβείας τε αὐτῶν, καὶ μελλούσης κολάσεως, ‘prediction of the deceitful rise of the heretics, their impiety and their punishment in the future.’ According to κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 2 Pet IV, the letter now returns to this theme, the difference being that κακία is substituted for ἀσέβεια (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 2 Pet ΙΙΙ). In the pre-text, the opening of κεφάλαιον IV (3:1) is clearly marked with a meta-communicative clause (δευτέραν ὑμῖν γράφω) and a vocative (ἀγαπητοί). The reader thus gets the impression that a new section begins, and thus the resumption of the preceding theme is unexpected.63 (d) The use of the term in the ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος of Acts differs from the instances EJTDVTTFE
BCPWF
BoD
TJODF
JU
IFSF
SFGFST
UP
UIF
SFQFUJUJPO
PG
BO
BOOPVODFNFOU
NBEF
CZ
BOPUIFS
DIBSBDUFS
1FUFS
SFQFBUT
JO
o
UIF
XPSET
PG
BOHFM
JO
Co Summation The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the letters use the term ἐπανάληψις for the resumption of a theme in a new section of the text. The use in the list for Acts is quite different, since it here refers to the repetition of a statement already made by another character. This difference may reflect the different text-types involved. In a narrative text this kind of repetition may occur more frequently than in an argumentative text. It is, however, worth noting that the κεφαλαι-τιτλοι of Acts do not use the term for the repetition of larger units within the text such as the repetition of the story in Acts 9 within the speeches in Acts 22 and 26.

1.5. The meta-terminology of the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι: Concluding Remarks The meta-terminology seems to be drawn from several sources. An obvious source is rhetoric, where we may find προοίμιον (Rom, 1 Cor) διήγησις (Gal, 2 Cor) and ἐπανάληψις (Acts, Rom, 2 Peter). But there are also other terms that are not usually associated with rhetoric but rather belong to the religious sphere, such as εὐχαριστία and εὐχή. The examination of the use of the meta-terms above has shown that the method of the κεφάλαιατίτλοι is quite consistent: The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι choose their terminology on the basis of the language of the pre-text and its meta-communicative terms. An interesting feature of their analysis of the letters is that they take the meta-communicative verbs εὐχαριστῶ and προσεύχομαι as references to speech acts within the pre-texts and not as statements about what the letter writer does as a habit: Thus, these verbs are transformed in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι into εὐχαριστία and εὐχή: Paul is regularly depicted as a man who prays

62

This term is used with reference to this verse by Weiss 1897: 235, cf. Jewett 2007: 501.

63

That 2 Pet 3 (= κεφάλαιον ΙV) resumes the theme 2 Pet 2 (= κεφάλαιον III) is observed also by Paulsen (1992: 148): ‘Der Vf. setzt mit 3,1 neu ein; während 2,1ff sich dem Problem der Häresie zuwandte und dies vor allem in der Aufnahme des Jud geschah, wird jetzt die Auseinandersetzung auf die Frage nach der Parusie und ihrer Leugnung durch die Gegner zugespitzt’. That the letter now turns to the theme of the coming of Christ is expressed in the ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος: ὅτι αἰφνιδίως ἥξει Χριστὸς κτλ, ‘that Christ will come suddenly…’.

Commentary on the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι

139

and one who gives thanks to God through his letters. The largest cluster of meta-terms seems, however, to be all those related to exhortation (παραίνεσις, παράκλησις).

1.6. Transformations and Additions to the Pre-text 2 Thess II: About the end, that it is after Antichrist, who is sent to convict (ἐπὶ ἐλέγχῳ) the Jews who did not believe in Christ. Pre-text (
ćFTT
o 

ГϮϵϰҀϪϣϫ
Ϣс
аϪѩ϶
ЋϢϣϩϲϭц
аɀсϮ
ϰѮ϶
ɀϟϮϭϱϯцϟ϶
ϰϭѼ
ϨϱϮцϭϱ
ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ […] (12) ἵνα κριθῶσιν πάντες οἱ μὴ πιστεύσαντες τῇ ἀληθείᾳ ἀλλὰ εὐδοκήσαντες τῇ ἀδικίᾳ The identification of ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἁμαρτίας (v. l. ἀνομίας, 2:3) with ‘Antichrist’ is common although the term ἀντίχριστος in the NT appears only the Johannine letters.64 A more remarkable transformation of the pre-text is the idea that Antichrist is sent to convict the unbelieving Jews. (1) In the pre-text, God is the one who sends strong delusion (πέμπει αὐτοῖς ὁ θεὸς ἐνέργειαν πλάνης, 2:11) to them who perish. This difficult idea has been connected to the Old Testament motive of God as the cause behind everything, even temptations and calamities.65 The κεφάλαιον-τίτλος presents this in a modified form by changing the active to the passive: God is no longer explicitly described as the sender of the delusion. (2) Also the replacement of κριθῶσιν with ἐπὶ ἐλέγχῳ appears to modify the pre-text. Although the corresponding verb ἐλέγχω may have the sense ‘convict, pronounce as guilty’, it can also be employed in a weaker sense as ‘to expose the guilt of someone’. (3) The identification of the unbelievers with the Jews is one of the relatively few anti-Jewish statements in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. The identification is not made explicitly in the pre-text but it is found in later commentaries on the passage. These commentators sometimes read the words τὴν ἀγάπην τῆς ἀληθείας οὐκ ἐδέξαντο (2 Thess 2:10) in the light of Jesus’ words to the Jews, καὶ οὐ λαμβάνετέ με (Joh 5:43).66 2 Peter II Command to remember the teaching after his death. How he heard the voice of God about the Son on Mount Tabor. 64

See 1 Joh 2:18.22; 4:3 and 2 Joh 1:7. The designation ‘antichrist’ may also be used with reference to the figure in 2 Thess. This identification is made also by Priscillian (Can. LXXXVII, G. Schepss 1889: 146): Quia ante iudicii diem veniet filius peccati qui intellegitur antichristus. ‘That before the day of judgment, the son of sin will come, who is known as antichrist.’ Thus also Theophylact on 2 Thess 2:3 (Commentary, PG 124: 1340BC): Οὐ γενήσεται, φησὶν, ἡ παρουσία τοῦ Κυρίου, ἐὰν μὴ ἔλθῃ ἡ ἀποστασία, τουτέστιν ὁ Ἀντίχριστος. ‘The coming of the Lord will not happen, he says, unless the defection has come, this is Antichrist.’ Cf. Trilling (1980: 83): ‘Eng mit dem Abfall-Geschehen verbunden ist das Hervortreten des Antichrist vorzustellen.’

65

This is pointed out by Trilling (1980: 112) on this passage: ‘Offenbar verlangt eine so streng theozentrische, alttestamentliche geprägte Denkweise des Verfassers (vgl. 1Kön 22,23; Ez 14,9), alle Ursächlichkeit radikal in Gott zu verankern.’

66

Theodoret (Commentary, PG

͂
IBWJOH
RVPUFE
+PI

JO
PSEFS
UP
UISPX
MJHIU
PO

ćFTT
o
says: Ἰουδαίοις τοίνυν μάλιστα πρόφασις συγγνώμης οὐδεμία καταλειφθήσεται. ‘Therefore, least of all, there will be left a reason to forgive the Jews.’ Cf. J. A. Bengel (1742: 843) commenting upon οὐκ ἐδέξαντο (2:10): Hoc vel maxime fecerunt Iudæi, Ioh. V. 43. Iudæisque inprimis damnosus erit Nefarius ille. ‘This [i.e. the rejection of Jesus] the Jews did more than anyone, Joh 5: 43. And it is against the Jews that the Abominable one will be most harmful.’ The fact that these two commentators, separated by several centuries, here refers to the same saying from the Gospel of John is not necessarily evidence of literary dependence.

140

Commentary

Pre-text (
1FU
o 

Ϣϧч
Ϫѩϩϩϭϫ
ЋϢϣϩϲϭц
ϯɀϭϱϢрϯϟϰϣ
ϠϣϠϟцϟϫ
аϪҀϫ
ϰуϫ
ϨϩѮϯϧϫ
καὶ ἐκλογὴν ποιεῖσθαι In the pre-text, there is a reference to the story of the Transfiguration (
1FUFS
o 
According to the pre-text, it happened ‘on the Holy Mountain’ (ἐν τῷ ἁγίῳ ὄρει). The κεφάλαιον-τίτλος has added that this took place on Mount Tabor. This name is not found in the NT but belongs to a later tradition. The event was probably assigned to this mountain because of its mention in the Psalms.67 Acts IX, ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος I: About Philip the apostle who healed many in Samaria. Pre-text ("DUT
o 

͖цϩϧɀɀϭ϶
Ϣс
ϨϟϰϣϩϦыϫ
ϣС϶
ϰуϫ
ɀшϩϧϫ
ϰѮ϶
͓ϟϪϟϮϣцϟ϶ In the pre-text, Philip is not the apostle but the deacon with the same name.68 A possible explanation is that the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος uses the title ‘apostle’ in a loose sense applying it to anyone who proclaims the word. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts may use this title for others, such as Paul and his companions.69 The sequence ‘Philip the apostle’ makes the impression, however, that Philip, one of the twelve, is intended (cf. ‘James the apostle, Acts κεφάλαιον-τίτλος XVIII). It has been suggested that the distinction in the NT between Philip the apostle and the deacon is secondary.70 If this is the case, the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος has unknowingly returned to an earlier stage of the tradition.

1.7. The ‘Paulusbild’ of the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Pauline letters differ from the pre-texts as they do not emphasize that Paul is an apostle. The phrase ‘Paul the apostle’ occurs only once: In the general heading of all κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Pauline letters.71 This may be no coincidence. It is remarkable that the general heading uses the title ‘apostle’ when it is not used in the following κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. One could argue that this neglect is due to the fact that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Pauline letters do not include the prescripts of the letter where the title is generally found in the pre-texts. But Paul’s apostleship is also a prominent theme in several letters (1 Cor 9; 
$PS
o
(BM
o
BOE
UIJT
JT
OPU
SFĘFDUFE
JO
UIF
κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. According to κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Gal I, the revelation (ἀποκάλυψις) led to his renunciation of Judaism (μεταστάσεως ἀπὸ Ἰουδαϊσμοῦ) and is not described as a call to apostleship. Κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 1 Tim II refers to Paul as being an ‘preacher’ (εὐαγγελιστής) from being a persecutor, while κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Rom XIX mentions his ‘service’ (λειτουργία, cf. λειτουργὸς Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ, Rom 15:16). Paul has according to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι a special mission although it is not referred to as his ‘apostleship’. 67

Probably, the words in Ps 88:13 LXX Θαβωρ καὶ Ερμων ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί σου ἀγαλλιάσονται, ‘Tabor and Hermon will rejoice in Thy name’ were interpreted as a prophecy, see Dahl 1998: 288, n. 474.

68

This Philip is included in the list of deacons in Acts 6:5. The main reason for identifying Philip in Acts 8 with Philip the deacon is that Luke says that the apostles remained in Jerusalem during the persecution (Acts 8:1) see Haenchen 1965: 252 and Jervell 1998: 259.

69

See κεφάλαια-τίτλοι Acts XXI and XXII. See also below on the ‘Paulusbild’ of the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι.

70

Haenchen (1965: 252) quotes Wellhausen on Philip: ‘Er führt nach Joa 12 die Hellenisten zu Jesus; dass er als Apostel zu einem der Zwölf geworden ist, …nimmt nicht Wunder.’

71

‘Survey of the general chapters of every letter of the Apostle Paul, some of them also having subdivisions written in red ink.’

Commentary on the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι

141

His mission involves the proclamation that sanctification is through faith in Christ and not through the Law (κεφάλαια-τίτλοι Gal IV; Rom IV). But although it is said that there is no sanctification through the Law, there is still a positive evaluation of the faithful Israel, which is not to be identified with the Christian church: In κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Rom XVI, the rejected Israel will return ‘in zeal of the Gentiles who had the privilege of being joined to the faithful Israel.’ The fact that this idea is included in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is worth noting. Related to this is the tendency in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι to pass over the polemics in Paul’s letters. The opponents of Paul are seldom mentioned and they are never identified as the ‘Jews’ or the ‘Judaizers’. In κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Gal XII, Paul is said to warn against ‘those who drag men to circumcision’ but these people are not described further. The controversial theme of circumcision is mentioned only twice (Gal X and XII). In addition, there is a tendency to avoid the term ‘Jew’. Thus, in its paraphrase of Rom 3:1, κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Rom III transforms τί τὸ περισσὸν τοῦ Ἰουδαίου into περὶ ὑπεροχῆς Ἰσραήλ. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι do not have much to say on the possible nonJewish opponent of Paul either: In κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Col VI, there is a reference to the ‘deceitful human philosophy’, but this appears to be a general warning and no real polemic is reflected. The reference to heresies are found mainly in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Pastoral epistles (κεφάλαια-τίτλοι 1 Tim VII, first ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος; 2 Tim VI; VIII; Tit II; VI). These are described as ‘innovators’ (καινοτομήσαντες, 2 Tim VIII) and ‘seditious inquirers’ (οἱ ἐριστικοὶ ζητηταί, Tit VI, cf. the μωραὶ ζητήσεις in Tit 3:10). It is however significant that the heretics referred to in some instances belong to the future. This is the case in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 2 Tim VI, where the reference to the heretics is explicitly said to be a ‘prediction’ (πρόῤῥησις), which reflects the pre-text (
5JN
o 
ćF
HFOFSBM
impression is thus that the polemic against Paul’s opponents does not appear as a center of interest in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. This may reflect the interest of the author(s) of the list. Another factor that should also be considered is the effect of the genre κεφάλαιον-τίτλος. The focus of the genre is thematic. Primarily, it gives the reader information on the theme of the pre-text. The frequent use of the περί-phrase is evidence of this. This may be the reason why the opponents often recede into the background. If the opponents themselves are not explicitly referred to in the pre-text, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι tend to focus on the theme that is treated. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts are not in complete agreement with the pre-text regarding Paul’s apostleship. In its paraphrase of "DUT
o
Ϩϣϲрϩϟϧϭϫϰцϰϩϭ϶
"DUT
9***
EFscribes the Damascus event as the ‘divine and heavenly call of Paul to the apostleship of Christ’ (ἀποστολὴ Χριστοῦ). This is not derived from the pre-text, but seems to echo the phrase from the Pauline letters (e.g. δι᾽ οὗ ἐλάβομεν χάριν καὶ ἀποστολήν Rom 1:5). The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts do not, however, refer to Paul as ‘the Apostle’ but do so only in the plural (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XXI; XXII; XXIV, fourth ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος; XXVIII, second ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος). This agrees with the pre-text, where Paul and Barnabas are referred to as ‘the apostles’ twice (14:4.14). The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts refers to the ‘Jews’ in different contexts: It is the Jews who brings false accusations against Stephen (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts VIII) and the more precise reference in the pre-text to members of certain named synagogues (Acts 6:9) is omitted. It is also the Jews who stone Paul at Lystra (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XXII) and who plan treachery against him (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XXXIV). The final κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XL does not highlight

142

Commentary

Paul’s preaching and teaching to all his visitors during his imprisonment in Rome (as does the final verse in the pre-text). Instead, the final κεφάλαιον-τίτλος speaks of ‘Paul’s discussion (διάλεξις) with the Jews in Rome’, with reference to "DUT
o
$JSDVNcision is mentioned twice: First as one of the decisions of the Apostolic Council, ‘that believers of the Gentiles do not have to be circumcised’ (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XXIII). The second reference balances this statement by referring to the appeal of James that Paul should not ‘appear as one who forbids circumcision among the Hebrews’ (κεφάλαιοντίτλος Acts XXXI). In the the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts, Paul also appears as one who can heal the sick (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XXII; XXVIII), and in general as a wonder-worker (ἐθαυματούργησεν, κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XXXVIII, second ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος). In general, one may find no clear inconsistencies in the ‘Paulusbild’ of the κεφάλαιατίτλοι. One may rather speak of a harmonizing tendency: The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the letters do not emphasize that Paul is an apostle (in contrast to the pre-texts), while those of Acts speaks of Paul’s ‘apostleship’ in a way that is reminiscent of the letters. The differences that may be noted, e.g. the interest in the wonders worked by Paul that is found only in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts may be related to different emphases found in the pretexts. The mighty deeds of Paul play a minor role in his letters but are far more important in Acts. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι seem to reflect this difference.

2. Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις 2.1. The Genre Υποθεσις The genre ὑπόθεσις is described by Wolfgang Raible as follows: ‘Es handelt sich um eine Situierung des Inhalts eines Dramas mit entsprechender Inhaltsangabe’.72 Raible is certainly right in establishing a link between the genre ὑπόθεσις and drama. One may say that the link between this genre and drama corresponds to the close association between the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and scientific literature (see above). Raible mentions two functions of the ὑπόθεσις. 1. It assigns the dramatic action to a specific place.73 2. It gives an outline of the plot. This outline may be considered the most important part of the ὑπόθεσις, and the reason why ὑποθέσεις often are referred to as ‘plot summaries’.74 In this aspect, the ὑποθέσεις probably had a model in the prologue-speeches of ancient tragedy and comedy. These are an organic part of the play and appear most often as their first scene,75 spoken by a ‘prologue god’ or one of the characters in the play. It is, however, important to note that these prologue speeches had as their main focus the pre-history of the plot, i.e. 72

See Raible 1995: 58.

73

This function may easily be misunderstood as though the ὑπόθεσις referred to where the play first was dramatically produced. The reference to the location is to the imagined place of the dramatic action. For USBOTNJUUJOH
JOGPSNBUJPO
BCPVU
UIF
FYUFSOBM
IJTUPSZ
PG
UIF
QMBZ
o
XIFO
JU
ĕSTU
XBT
TUBHFE
XIP
QBJE
GPS
UIF
production etc., the ancient scholars used the genre ‘didascalic note’ (διδασκαλίαι). But these didascalic notes occasionally receive the heading ‘ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ’, see e.g. K. Dover 1968.

74

See e.g. the commentary of M. J. Cropp (1988: 3) on Euripides’ Electra.

75

Although some dramatists used a ‘deferred’ prologue placed after the opening scene, when the curiosity of the audience already had been aroused and they could bear to listen to a prologue. An example of this is Menander’s Epitrepontes, see the translation of Murray (1945: 232).

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

143

what has happened before the play begins. This narrative has the function of transporting the audience (or the reader) swiftly to an ‘interesting’ dramatic situation. The audience should not have to watch the history of an entire dynasty. Instead, they should as soon as possible become familiar with its most interesting personalities. A chronicle of the preceding events would be impossible to transfer to the stage, or, if possible, it would be tedious. This pre-history is instead presented to them in a condensed form, so that they may be well prepared to appreciate the action of the play itself. But sometimes the speaker of the prologue reveals more, and also tells what is going to happen ‘today’.76 If this happens, the prologue speech represents the equivalent of a ὑπόθεσις.77 The genre ὑπόθεσις in a narrow sense was, however, in antiquity always an inorganic part of the work, composed by a later hand. When this inorganic ὑπόθεσις was added to the play, the play could actually have two introductions. The association of the genre ὑπόθεσις with drama is found also in a recent study by Joseph Sievers, who identifies the ὑπόθεσις as the ‘front matter’ of Greek drama that gives an outline of the plot and other information. In contrast to Raible, Sievers adds that ὑποθέσεις may sometimes be used with rhetorical works, but hardly, if at all, with the works of historians. Sievers thus requires another designation for similar summaries of historical works, and chooses the term argumentum for this purpose. According to Sievers, argumentum is not an ancient designation, but is in current use among palaeographers, codicologists and classical scholars.78 But this division between the genres ὑπόθεσις and argumentum is not supported by ancient sources. The term is in fact an ancient designation and it seems to have been the standard Latin rendering of ὑπόθεσις.79 In the present study, the two terms are therefore considered as synonyms.80 Zuntz has emphasized that there existed in antiquity ὑποθέσεις of practically all branches of literature.81 The definition of Raible that confines the ὑπόθεσις to drama should therefore be modified: The ὑπόθεσις can reflect a work of any genre. Regarding the stylistic characteristics of the genre, one may say that a ὑπόθεσις, in contrast to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, forms a continuous text written in complete sentenc76

This may be referred to as the speaker’s ‘prediction’, see the commentary of D. Christenson 2000: 131.

77

The term ὑπόθεσις may also be used in a completely different sense, i.e. the script that the theatre troupes used as a guideline. Such a ὑπόθεσις may be used as a basis for improvisation and expanded by the actor(s) during the performance. An example of this may be found in the so-called ‘Oxyrhynchos Mime’; for text and translation see Beare

o

78

See J. Sievers 2007: 273.

79

It is found in the manuscripts in headings of plot summaries of the plays of Plautus, e.g. ARGVMENTVM IN EPIDICVM PLAVTI, ‘Argument of the Epidicus of Plautus’, see Duckworth (1940/1979: 3). Moreover, it is used in meta-communicative clauses in the text of the plays to refer to the plot, see e.g. Plautus, Amphitryo 96 and Terence, Andria 6.

80

Cf. Raible 1995: 58.

81

See Zuntz 1945: 81. For texts see e.g., Scholia Graeca in Homeri Odysseam (G. Dindorfius 1855). Among this diverse material, there is a ‘Hypothesis of the entire Odyssey’ (Ὑπόθεσις τῆς ὅλης Ὀδυσσείας, Dindorfius

o
BOE
BMTP
аɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
PG
BMM

TPOHT
EJTUSJCVUFE
UISPVHIPVU
UIF
XPSL
'PS
аɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
PG
Greek tragedy, see the Scholia Graeca in Aeschylum (O. L. Smith
o
BOE
UIF
FEJUJPOT
PG
4PQIPDMFT
(R. D. Dawe 1984) and Euripides (J. Diggle
o 
'PS
аɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
PG
UIF
TQFFDIFT
PG
%FNPTUIFOes, see the study of C. Gibson (2003). The ὑπόθεσις that precedes Eutechnius’ paraphrase of Nicander’s Theraica shows that the genre also could appear in the context of didactic or scientific works, see the edition of the paraphrase by I. Gualandri 1968: 21.

144

Commentary

es.82 It can therefore not be distributed throughout the pre-text (as is the case with the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι). Most often, the ὑπόθεσις appears at the beginning, as an introduction to the work. Thus they may be closely associated with κεφάλαια-τίτλοι,83 as is the case in the majority of Euthalian manuscripts.84 Reconstruction of the pre-history of the events is important also in the ὑποθέσεις of argumentative texts. In the example below, the events that preceded the speech are narrated in detail. Pseudo-Libanius, Hypotheses to the Orations of Demosthenes, ὑπόθεσις 30 [Demosthenes 29], ed. R. Foerster.

Transl. by $
(JCTPO

o 

[History of the case] [History of the case] Κρινόμενος τῆς ἐπιτροπῆς Ἄφοβος ἐξῄτει While Aphobus was still a defendant in the παρὰ Δημοσθένους Μιλύαν εἰς βάσανον εἰδὼς guardianship case, he demanded Milyas οὐ δοθησόμενον. οὐ γὰρ ἐδίδου Δημοσθένης from Demosthenes for torture, knowing that φάσκων οὐκ οἰκέτην, ἀλλ᾽ ἐλεύθερον εἶναι Demosthenes would not give him up. Demosτὸν Μιλύαν ἐλευθερωθέντα ὑπο τοῦ πατρός, thenes did not give him up, saying that Milyas ὅτε ἐτελεύτα, καὶ εἰς τούτου πίστιν ἄλλα τε was not a slave, but rather was a free man who παρεχόμενος καὶ δὴ καὶ μαρτυρίαν Φάνου, was manumitted by his father upon his death. ὃς ἐμαρτύρησε πρὸς τοὺς δικαστὰς φάσκων As a proof of this, he offered (among other eviὡμολογηκέναι Ἄφοβον ἐπὶ τοῦ διαιτητοῦ dence) the testimony of Phanus, who testified ἐλεύθερον εἶναι Μιλύαν. ἁλοὺς δὴ τῆς before the jury, saying that Aphobus had adἐπιτροπῆς Ἄφοβος ψευδομαρτυριῶν Φάνῳ mitted before the arbitrator that Milyas was a δικάζεται, free man. Convicted in the guardianship case, Aphobus takes Phanus to court on a charge of perjury. [Summary] ὑπὲρ οὗ τοῦτον τὸν λόγον ὁ Δημοσθένης λέγει καὶ τἀληθῆ φάσκων αὐτὸν μεμαρτυρηκέναι καὶ πρὸς τούτῳ δεικνὺς ὡς οὐδὲν ἐκ ταύτης τῆς μαρτυρίας Ἄφοβος ἐβλάβη, ἀλλὰ δι᾽ ἑτέρους ἥλω μάρτυρας, οἷς οὐκ ἐπισκηψάμενος δῆλός ἐστιν ἠδικηκώς.

[Summary] Demosthenes delivers this speech on behalf of Phanus, saying that Phanus has testified truthfully, and he furthermore shows that Aphobus was in no way harmed because of this testimony, but rather was convicted because of other witnesses, and as he had not successfully prosecuted them, it was clear that he had done wrong.

The author of the ὑποθέσεις has read the speeches carefully and reconstructed the history of each case. The idea is that the reader who is familiar with these matters can more easily appreciate the speech. The ὑπόθεσις is thus divided into two main parts: (a) a narrative section relating the history of the case; and (b) a summary of the speech. It is seen that 82

This is the rule, but there are exceptions. Some of the ὑποθέσεις of the Gospels contain series of περίphrases that are close to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. These are connected with καί, and may be based on lists of κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. See the ὑπόθεσις of Matthew in Pseudo-Athanasius, Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae (PG 28: 385B, translated in Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004: 511; App. II, page 337).

83

Since the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι may be reproduced twice, both in the beginning of the work and in the margin.

84

According to Willard (1970: 92/2009: 69), in most manuscripts where ὑποθέσεις occur, they immediately precede the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι.

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

145

the same basic scheme is followed in many of the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις. In the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις of the letters, the communicative situation is described first by an introductory notice on the author of the letter and the place (and time) of composition. Then follows a section on the πρόφασις (occasion) of the letter, which gives the reason why the letter was written. As in the Hypotheses to the Orations of Demosthenes, the communicative situation is reconstructed mainly on the basis of the pre-text. But the communicative situation may occasionally be described as viewed from a greater distance. Thus, the ὑπόθεσις of Eph in the medieval commentary of Theophylact includes a description of the city of Ephesus and its once famous shrine.85 One may assume that this kind of description is written for readers who no longer had detailed knowledge of the ancient world and that the function of the ὑπόθεσις is to create a picture of this world in order to assist the reader. One should, on the other hand, avoid drawing the conclusion that silence regarding questions of geography or chronology means that the readers of the ὑπόθεσις were supposed to be acquainted with these matters. The subjects included in a ὑπόθεσις may belong to many different areas; from detailed paraphrases of passages to descriptions of the world in which the text originated. There are, however, many recurrent features, and one may assume that behind many ὑποθέσεις lies some kind of ‘search formula’ (German: Suchformel). This may be presented as a series of questions related to the work:86 Matthieu de Vendôme (12th cent.)

Translated by Thomas Wilson (16th cent.)

Quis, quid, ubi, quibus auxiliis, cur, quomodo, Who, what, and where, by what help, and by quando. whose: Why, how, and when, do many things disclose.

In the opening of his commentary on the Aeneid, Servius shows his debt to this method: ‘In the exposition of authors, the following themes should be treated: The life of the poet, the title of the work, the genre of the poem, the intention of its author, the number of books, the order of books, and the explanation of the work.’87 85

Theophylact (ὑπόθεσις of Eph, PG

%o" 
;ϲϣϯϭ϶
ϪϥϰϮшɀϭϩϧ϶
Ϫтϫ
Гϯϰϧ
ϰѮ϶
ͳϯцϟ϶r
ГϯтϠϣϰϭ
δὲ τὴν Ἄρτεμιν, ἧς καὶ ναὸς ἦν ἐν αὐτῇ κάλλιστος καὶ μέγιστος, τιμώμενος, καὶ παρὰ πάντων μὲν Ἑλλήνων, μάλιστα δὲ παρὰ τῆς Ἐφέσου, ὥστε καὶ νεωκόρον τῆς Ἀρτέμιδος λέγεσθαι ταύτην, ὡς ἐν ταῖς Πράξεσι γέγραπται. ‘Ephesus was the chief city of Asia. It honored Artemis, and her largest and most beautiful shrine was found there, honored by all Greeks, but especially by Ephesus itself, so that the city also was called “the worshipper of Artemis”, as it is written in the Acts.’ (cf. Acts 19:35).

86

For the text and translation of this formula, see Plett 2001: 13. The formula is also known in Greek form, see Henne

o
DG
H. Lausberg 1998: § 328 with reference to Quintilian, InstOr 4,2,55: persona, causa, locus, tempus, instrumentum, occasio; Lausberg 1998: § 373. Cicero, Inv. 1,21. H. Geissner 2001: o
M. Fuhrmann 1984: 99.

87

In exponendis auctoribus haec consideranda sunt: poetae vita, titulus operis, qualitas carminis, scribentis intentio, numerus librorum, ordo librorum, explanatio. Servius, Commentary on the Aeneid, Preface. The use of a ‘search formula’ may be seen behind the ‘Marcionite’ prologues, or better: ὑποθέσεις (Text in Souter

o 
ćFTF
TIPSU
UFYUT
BSF
RVJUF
NPOPUPOPVT
BT
UIFZ
BMM
CSJOH
UIF
BOTXFST
UP
UIF
GPMlowing questions: 1. Where did the recipients live? 2. What had happened to them? 3. What does Paul do in his letter to them? 4. From where did Paul write? These questions are not asked in the prologues, but must have belonged to the author’s scheme, e.g.: ‘The Laodiceans are Asians. They had received the word of truth and remained faithful. The Apostle praises them, writing from Ephesus.’ On the disposition of the ‘Marcionite’ prologues, see Dahl 1978/2000: 189.

146

Commentary

The genre ὑπόθεσις thus represents not only a summary but also a widening of the reader’s perspective that may go beyond the mere pre-text. Raible’s definition of the genre as both ‘Situierung’ and ‘Inhaltsangabe’ may still be considered valid, if ‘Situierung’ is taken in a wide sense. The apparent function of the genre ὑπόθεσις is to guide the reader before he or she is going to read the work itself. But the genre could also be used differently: In contrast to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, there are examples of collections of ὑποθέσεις that are transmitted separately, without the pre-text. Zuntz has argued that ὑποθέσεις in antiquity originally were written as substitutes for the originals, and that their use as introductions is secondary. It is a common opinion that some of the ὑποθέσεις of the plays of Euripides which precede the plays in the manuscripts once formed a separate book, Tales from Euripides. This book was intended to be read independently of the plays. Later editors found the Tales useful introductions to the plays, and used them for that purpose.88 There is a possible parallel to this phenomenon in the transmission of the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις: In the pseudo-Athanasian Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae, the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις are reproduced without the biblical text. The work is a collection of ὑποθέσεις of the entire Bible.89 There are no major studies devoted to this work, and the literary relations between the Synopsis and the Euthalian apparatus have not been investigated. The question of the original function of the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις cannot be answered at the present stage of research. They may either have been part of an edition of the letters, or they may have been published separately. A related question is the role of the genre ὑπόθεσις in ancient exegetical commentaries. The ὑποθέσεις of Theodoret often refer explicitly to the following commentary. These references may function almost as an excuse for the superficial treatment of the material in the ὑποθέσεις, and the reader is assured that everything will be clear if the reader will study the commentary.90 It is interesting to note that no such reference is found in the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις. The lack of such references does of course not mean that a detailed ‘Euthalian’ exposition of the biblical text never existed, but we have no evidence of such a commentary.91

88

See Zuntz 1945: 81. On the Tales from Euripides, see the study by J. Rusten 1982.

89

On the Synopsis, see Robinson

o


90

See, e.g. Theodoret in his ὑπόθεσις of 2 Thessalonians: Ἑκάστου δὲ τούτων τὴν διάνοιαν ἐκ τῆς τῶν ῥητῶν ἑρμηνείας εἰσόμεθα (PG 82: 657B). ‘We will understand the meaning of every part of this from the exposition of the text.’

91

Already Zacagni spent great efforts to find the supposed Euthalian commentaries, as he was intrigued by references to Euthalian commentaries on Luke and Acts in the works of scholars such as Lucas Holstenius o
BOE
1FUSVT
-BNCFDJVT
o 
)JT
MPOH
BOE
UIPSPVHI
TFBSDI
UISPVHI
UIF
7BUJDBO
-Jbraries was however unsuccessful, and he could not find the material anywhere. The references to Euthalius in the works of these 17th century scholars deserve further investigation, although we presently may have confidence in Zacagni’s words. On this subject, see Zacagni

MYYoMYYJ

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

147

2.2. The Hypotheses of the Pauline Letters 2.2.1. Authorship The question of authorship is complicated by the fact that ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters are found in different works. They appear in Euthalius, in the commentary of Oecumenius (PG
o
BOE
JO
UIF
QTFVEP"UIBOBTJBO
Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae (PG 28: o 
"U
UIF
QSFTFOU
TUBHF
PG
SFTFBSDI
UIF
IJTUPSZ
PG
UIF
UFYU
JT
VODMFBS
ćF
аɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
of the Pauline letters may be considered to be part of a common Greek tradition, with the author remaining anonymous. 2.2.2. Structure The ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters are composed according to the following arrangement.92 1. An introductory notice. This notice records the place of composition and says whether Paul at the time of writing had met the recipients or not. 2. The prophasis of the letter. This section explains the occasion or reason (προφασις) why the letter was written. It is a reconstruction of the historical circumstances based primarily on the pre-text. Occasionally, the text of Acts or another letter is used. 3. A summary of the contents of the letter, beginning with καὶ πρῶτον μέν in all ὑποθέσεις except Philemon. 4. A notice on the letter’s ending, usually in the form καὶ οὕτως τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. 2.2.3. Διὰ τί: An Ancient Introduction to the Ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline Letters The distinction between two groups of letters based on whether Paul had met the addressees or not is characteristic of the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις. This distinction is also found in a short paragraph referred to in the secondary literature as Διὰ τί. This paragraph was also included in Zacagni’s edition of Euthalius. von Soden has the following text: Διὰ τί. Text in von Soden 1902: 663.

My translation

Διὰ τί Παύλου ἐπιστολαὶ δεκατέσσαρες λέγονται; ἐπειδὴ ταύτας ὁ ἀπόστολος ἰδίᾳ ἐπιστέλλει καὶ διὰ τούτων, οὓς μὲν ἤδη ἑώρακεν καὶ ἐδίδαξεν, ὑπομιμνῄσκει καὶ διορθοῦται, οὓς δὲ μὴ ἑώρακεν, σπουδάζει κατηχεῖν καὶ διδάσκειν ὡς ἔστιν ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν τὸν ἐντυγχάνοντα καταμαθεῖν.

Why are they called ‘The Fourteen Letters of Paul?’ Because the Apostle himself writes them with his own hand. And through these [letters], he reminds and corrects those he has already seen, while he is eager to instruct and teach those he has not seen, so that it is possible for the reader to learn well from them.

According to Willard, this paragraph has no fixed place in the manuscripts.93 It has been suggested that the paragraph originally was an introduction to the series of ὑποθέσεις 92

See the remarks in Ehrhard 1891: 391.

93

See Willard 1970: 102/2009: 76.

148

Commentary

of the Pauline letters.94 The text was misunderstood by Robinson, who described Διὰ τί Παύλου ἐπιστολαὶ δεκατέσσαρες λέγονται as an absurd heading to the following note ГɀϣϧϢу
o
ϨϟϰϟϪϟϦϣѴϫ 
"DDPSEJOH
UP
Robinson, the note does not even attempt to answer the question.95 Robinson said this because he understood the question to concern the number of the letters.96 The question does however not concern the number of the Pauline letters, but the name Παύλου. The question and answer reflect the concern of the ancient commentators with the name of the book.97 The point is simply that the book of Pauline letters is named after the author.98 This question is answered quite clearly. The idea that the Διὰ τί served as an introduction to the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters is appealing. Not only does the paragraph explain the name of the book, but it also helps the reader to understand why the reading of the Pauline letters is particularly beneficial: As Paul had written to different kinds of recipients, every reader of the book may find something useful; either providing elementary instruction or reminding of things already known. The use of καταμαθεῖν in this context may point to the complete education of the reader. The corresponding passage in the Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae has an interesting textual variant. Here, it is said that the learning is indirect, mediated through people who read the Pauline letters.99 The variant reading may reflect the use of the ὑποθέσεις as replacements for the biblical text, and not as introductions. This corresponds to the use classical scholars have surmised for the original Tales of Euripides.100 2.2.4. Hypothesis of Romans Hypothesis of the Letter to the Romans This form of the heading appears in most of the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters.101 He sends this letter from Corinth (cf. 16:1), while he has not yet seen them, but has heard about them and longs to see them (1:13).

94

See von Dobschütz 1893: 70. Dahl (2000d: 255) made the same suggestion independently of von Dobschütz.

95

See Robinson 1895: 20; Willard 1970: 102/2009: 76.

96

In a list of Zacagni’s materials, Robinson (1895: 14) refers to this piece as ‘a note on their number.’

97

See the list of topics in the commentary of Servius on the Aeneid quoted above.

98

In contrast to e.g. the Book of Iob, which is named after its protagonist. Cf. the remarks of von Dobschütz (1893: 70) on the corresponding piece in the Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae. von Dobschütz understands this as an explanation of the name of the book.

99

ὡς ἔστιν ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν τῶν ἐντυγχανόντων καταμαθεῖν (PG 28: 412D). ‘So that it is possible to learn well from those who read them’. In this variant, the genitive αὐτῶν has contaminated the following participle and a completely different meaning arises. This change is probably intentional as it occurs here, in the Synopsis, which does not include the biblical text. The meaning may be that one should learn from the readers of the letters when they in their general teaching pass on what they have learned, since ἐντυγχάνω refers more to the personal ‘encounter’ and ‘conversation’ with the book than it does to the act of reading (ἀναγινώσκω, cf. Rev 1:3).

100 See above on the genre ὑπόθεσις. 101 In von Soden’s text, the ὑποθέσεις of Col, 1 Thess and Heb add Παύλου in the headings. It is difficult to see any pattern in these variations.

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

149

That the letter is sent from Corinth is not stated explicitly in the pre-text, but is deduced from the remark about Phoebe, the servant of the church at Cenchrea in 16:1.102 The ὑπόθεσις does not give any information regarding the situation of the addressees, other than the fact that Paul had not yet seen them. Thus, Paul’s reasons for writing the letter are not explained and the ὑπόθεσις of Rom is unique among the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters in not having a section on the occasion (prophasis) of the letter. In this, the ὑπόθεσις of Rom resembles the majority of the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters. Possibly, this feature is related to the genre of the letter. Like 1 Peter and James, Romans is described as a didactic letter (see below), and the ὑποθέσεις of these letters do not have a prophasis section. The idea seems to be that a didactic letter containing teaching on the fundamentals of faith does not need to have a specific occasion. And first (καὶ πρῶτον), he praises (ἀποδέχεται) their faith, which he sees announced everywhere Pre-text (Rom 1:8): πρῶτον μὲν εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ μου διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ περὶ πάντων ὑμῶν, ὅτι ἡ πίστις ὑμῶν καταγγέλλεται ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ κόσμῳ The words καὶ πρῶτον mark the opening of the summary, as in the ὑποθέσεις of all Pauline letters except Philemon. The pre-text uses a meta-communicative verb (εὐχαριστῶ) that is not reflected in the ὑπόθεσις. Instead, the ὑπόθεσις has αποδεχεται. This change may indicate that the ὑπόθεσις does not take εὐχαριστῶ as referring to the text of the letter, but rather to Paul’s habitual thanksgivings for the Romans. This interpretation may be supported by the mentioning of Paul’s prayers in 1:10, πάντοτε ἐπὶ τῶν προσευχῶν μου. Commentators on this passage often refer to Paul as a man who prays, and assert that his prayers are expressed in the text of his letters.103 The replacement of the metacommunicative verb in the ὑπόθεσις highlights another aspect of the pre-text: In the paraphrase of 1:8, the ὑπόθεσις focuses on Paul’s praise of the Romans, not his praise of God. The focus on Paul’s praise of the Romans is a step towards a rhetorical analysis of the letter, since ‘praise’ is a stock element of the captatio bevenvolentiae that is associated with the exordium.104 And now, he composes the letter as a didactic (διδασκαλική) letter about the call to the Gentiles. And [he says] that (ὅτι) circumcision lasted until a certain time, but now it has been abolished. And [he says] that (ὅτι) the fall of Adam was atoned through Christ, and that the shadow of the Law (ἡ σκιὰ τοῦ νόμου) passed away. 102 This idea is found in Theodoret (Preface, PG 82: 42B), Ὅτι δὲ ἀπὸ Κορίνθου γέγραφε τὴν πρὸς Ῥωμαίους ἐπιστολὴν, σαφῶς ἡμᾶς αὐτὸ διδάσκει τὸ τέλος. Πρῶτον μὲν γὰρ τὴν Φοίβην συνίστησι, διάκονον αὐτὴν εἶναι λέγων τῆς ἐν Κεγχρεαῖς ἐκκλησίας. ‘The conclusion teaches us that he wrote the Letter to the Romans from Corinth. Because first he recommends Phoebe saying that she is a deacon in the church at Cenchreae.’ Similarly Theophylact (Commentary, PG 124: 549B). Corinth is mentioned also in the Byzantine subscription (see the apparatus criticus on the letter ending in the N. A. edition). The ‘Marcionite’ prologue, on the other hand, shows Athens as the place of writing (Text in Souter 1913: 206). 103 Thus Michel (1978: 80): ‘Mit der Zuschrift tritt uns der Apostel als Beter in seinem Dank, in seiner Fürbitte und in seinem Gebetswunsch entgegen. Stil und Ausdrucksweise stammt aus der jüdischen Gebetssprache.’ Similarly Jewett (2007: 119), who thinks that a prayer is being performed both in the writing of this passage and when it is read aloud to the hearers in Rome. For a different perspective, which describes the Pauline thanksgivings rather as ‘prayer reports’, see P. T. O’Brien 1974. 104 See Lausberg 1998: §277αβ.

150

Commentary

The letter is described as a didactic letter, a genre-designation that is also found in the epistolographic handbook ascribed to Libanius.105 The clauses that follow the genredesignation in the ὑπόθεσις are not part of the following continuous summary of the pre-text, but rather a selection of main points. The style of these clauses resembles the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, and thus they differ from the rest of the ὑπόθεσις: The first clause is a genre-designation followed by a prepositional phrase and two ὅτι-clauses. Even if this passage of the ὑπόθεσις is not a paraphrase of the propositio of the pre-text (o


B
comparison between the two is possible, since both texts are short expositions of main points. From this it may be observed that the view of Judaism and the prerogatives of the Jews is different in the two texts. In the pre-text, the Jew has a priority over the Greek (Ἰουδαίῳ τε πρῶτον καὶ Ἕλληνι, 1:16). This priority may be understood in various ways. It may refer to the historical process, or to the theological interpretation of that process, which gives Israel a special role to play in the history of salvation.106 In the ὑπόθεσις, the idea of priority is completely abandoned. Here, the emphasis is put on the abolishment of Jewish practices: Circumcision is something that belongs to the past.107 Correspondingly, the ὑπόθεσις states that ‘the shadow of the Law’ (ἡ σκιὰ τοῦ νόμου) has passed away. This phrase is not found in the pre-text, and may be dependent on Heb 10:1 σκιὰν ἔχων ὁ νόμος τῶν μελλόντων ἀγαθῶν. Therefore, he also reasonably makes accusations (αἰτιᾶται), first against the Greeks. Pre-text (Rom 3:9b): προῃτιασάμεθα γὰρ Ἰουδαίους τε καὶ Ἕλληνας The use of the verb αἰτιάομαι in the ὑπόθεσις shows that the ὑπόθεσις may borrow and modify a meta-communicative verb in the pre-text. In the pre-text, προῃτιασάμεθα (ᾐτιασάμεθα D G pc) is used in 3:9 with reference to the accusations Paul has made against the Jews and Gentiles in the preceding text (o 108 The ὑπόθεσις has prob105 Διδασκαλικὴ δι᾽ ἧς διδάσκομέν τινα περί τινος, Pseudo-Libanius, De forma epistolari 31, cf. 78. A description of Romans that is similar to the Euthalian ὑπόθεσις is found in Theodoret (ὑπόθεσις of Rom, PG 82: 44C), although he does not use the genre-designation for the letter: Ποικίλην μὲν καὶ παντοδαπὴν ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος διὰ τῶνδε τῶν γραμμάτων προσφέρει διδασακαλίαν, ‘through this letter the divine Apostle brings various teaching of every kind.’ 106 Michel (1978: 88) argues for the second alternative: ‘Wenn Jesus sich zunächst an Israel gesandt weiss, wenn Paulus über die Synagoge an das Heidentum herantritt, so liegt in diesem Weg des Evangeliums nicht nur ein zeitlicher Vorsprung Israel, sondern eine heilsgeschichtliche Notwendigkeit.’ Other perspectives are also possible, such as an emphasis on Jesus as the Jewish Messiah, see Jewett 2007: 140 n. 55. 107 This is a main point of the ὑπόθεσις. This focus on the abolishment of Jewish practices is found also in the ‘Marcionite’ prologue: Romani sunt in parte Italiae. Hi praeventi a pseudoapostolis, sub nomine domini nostri Iesu Christi in lege et prophetis erant inducti. Hos revocat apostolus ad veram et evangelicam fidem (Text in Souter 1913: 206). ‘The Romans are partly of Italian origin. They were reached first by the false apostles, and under the name of Jesus Christ led by means of the Law and the prophets. The Apostle calls them back to the true faith of the Gospel, writing to them from Athens.’ A different interpretation is found in Theodoret (ὑπόθεσις of Rom, PG 82: 45BC), who says that Paul in Romans is fighting a battle at two different fronts: […] καὶ Ἰουδαίους ᾔδει λίαν ἀντεχομένους τοῦ νόμου, καὶ τοὺς τὰ Μαρκίωνος καὶ Βαλεντίνου νοσοῦντας, καὶ μέντοι καὶ Μανιχαίους, λίαν τούτου κατηγοροῦντας, καθάπερ ἄριστός τις στρατηγὸς πάντοθεν ὑπὸ πολεμίων κυκλούμενος, καὶ τούτους βάλλει κἀκείνους, καὶ τὸ τρόπαιον ἵστησιν. ‘He knew both the Jews, who were very loyal to the Law, as well as those who suffered from the diseases of Marcion and Valentinus, and the Manichees, who were strongly accusing it. Thus, being completely surrounded by enemies, as an eminent general, he hits both and wins the trophy.’ 108 See Jewett 2007: 258.

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

151

ably removed the preverb (προ) in order to use the verb at this earlier point, as an introduction to the accusations.109 For Abram, he says, after being justified not in circumcision, but before circumcision (Rom 4:10), was called by the new name of Abraham ((FO
o , because he should be a father of many nations (Gen 17:5; 3PN
o according to the faith he had as uncircumcised.

A main point in the ὑπόθεσις is the change of name from Abram to Abraham, and the significance of this change. Oddly, the ὑπόθεσις makes Paul say this. The point has no basis in the pre-text, where the change of name is not mentioned at all. The actual pre-text here is therefore not the text of Romans, but rather the story of Abraham as told in Gen 17, which is also a pre-text of Rom 4. After he was justified (μετὰ τὸ δικαιωθῆναι), he received also the circumcision in the flesh (ἐν σαρκί), so that it should be a sign to his descendants according to the flesh (κατὰ σάρκα). Circumcision will once come to an end when the Gentiles become children of Abraham and start to live according to the faith of Abraham, by which he was justified when he was uncircumcised. Pre-text (3PN
o 
Ϩϟх
ϯϥϪϣѴϭϫ
ЗϩϟϠϣϫ
ɀϣϮϧϰϭϪѮ϶
ϯϲϮϟϡѴϢϟ
ϰѮ϶
ϢϧϨϟϧϭϯъϫϥ϶
ϰѮ϶
πίστεως τῆς ἐν τῇ ἀκροβυστίᾳ, εἰς τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν πατέρα πάντων τῶν πιστευόντων δι’ ἀκροβυστίας, εἰς τὸ λογισθῆναι αὐτοῖς τὴν δικαιοσύνην, καὶ πατέρα περιτομῆς τοῖς οὐκ ἐκ περιτομῆς μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῖς στοιχοῦσιν τοῖς ἴχνεσιν τῆς ἐν ἀκροβυστίᾳ πίστεως τοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν Ἀβραάμ. The ὑπόθεσις has transformed the meaning of the pre-text: (1) In the pre-text, Abraham received the sign of circumcision as ‘seal (σφραγῖδα) of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised’. The description of the sign as a seal of righteousness is not reproduced in the ὑπόθεσις. In the ὑπόθεσις, the connection between the righteousness of Abraham and his circumcision is not evident. The sign is given to him after he was justified (μετὰ τὸ δικαιωθῆναι), but beyond this chronological sequence, the relationship between the two events is not explained. The ὑπόθεσις emphasizes that the circumcision of Abraham was ‘in the flesh’ (ἐν σαρκί) and that it was intended as a sign for his descendants ‘according to the flesh’ (κατὰ σάρκα). By omitting the description of circumcision as a seal of righteousness and by focusing on the physical aspect, the ὑπόθεσις has reduced the importance of the sign. (2) In the pre-text, Abraham is described as ancestor both of all uncircumcised believers and of all the circumcised who follow the example of the faith he had when being uncircumcised. It is commonly assumed that the second group is Jewish Christians.110 This picture is changed in the ὑπόθεσις, where the Jewish Christians no longer are referred to as a separate group. Instead, the sign of circumcision will come to an end when the Gentiles become children of Abraham. But if Abram received a new name from God, the Gentiles do not have to be circumcised, and not even they who are Jews according to the flesh (κατὰ σάρκα)

109 The other explanation, that the ὑπόθεσις here uses a text with the ‘Western’ reading ᾐτιασάμεθα may also be considered. 110 See e.g. Michel 1978: 167; E. Käsemann 1980: 116; Jewett

o

152

Commentary

The ὑπόθεσις states that not even those who are Jews according to the flesh need circumcision. The addition κατὰ σάρκα implies that the ὑπόθεσις here refers to Christians of Jewish origin. The reason alleged for the abolishment of circumcision is again that Abram received a new name from God. With this radical view of circumcision, the ὑπόθεσις goes beyond what Paul says in the pre-text (e.g. 3PN
o
BOE
XIBU
IF
TBZT
JO
IJT
MFUters in general. In 
$PS
o
UIF
NBJO
QPJOU
JT
UIBU
FWFSZCPEZ
TIPVME
SFNBJO
JO
UIF
condition he was when he was called: ἡ περιτομὴ οὐδέν ἐστιν, καὶ ἡ ἀκροβυστία οὐδέν ἐστιν, ἀλλὰ τήρησις ἐντολῶν θεοῦ (1 Cor 7:19).111 Through no other could this (i.e. sin) be erased, he says, than through Jesus Christ, through whom also the curse (κατάρα) came from the beginning.

The ‘curse’ probably refers to (FO
o
XIFSF
(PE
DVSTFT
UIF
TOBLF
ГɀϧϨϟϰрϮϟϰϭ϶
σύ, v.14) and the soil (ἐπικατάρατος ἡ γῆ, v.17).112 This passage was associated with Christ in the Early Church, especially because of the so-called Protevangelium (Gen 3:15): καὶ ἔχθραν θήσω ἀνὰ μέσον σου καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τῆς γυναικὸς καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ σπέρματός σου καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ σπέρματος αὐτῆς· αὐτός σου τηρήσει κεφαλὴν, καὶ σὺ τηρήσεις αὐτοῦ πτέρναν. The seed of the woman was understood as a reference to Christ.113 Thus, if the verbs are taken not as referring to habitual actions, but to unique events in the future, Gen 3:15 may be read as a prophecy of the death of Christ and his victory over the devil. The words of the ὑπόθεσις that the curse came through Christ are still problematic. (1) It could be objected that the curse in (FO
o
JT
TUSJDUMZ
TQFBLJOH
OPU
B
DVSTF
PO
NBO
only on the snake and the soil.114 For the ancient interpreter, this objection would probably not be considerable. The curse on the soil in v. 17 affects man’s condition severely, and the announcement in v. 19 that man from now on must return to dust, may aptly be described as a curse.115 In the ὑπόθεσις, it is probably the curse on man that is referred to here, not the curse on the snake in v. 14. This follows from the context: The idea is that the curse on man, which followed from his transgression, was lifted through Christ, who, in turn, was the same person through whom the curse came. (2) The association of the curse with Christ may seem unexpected, but it is known from tradition. Firstly, Christ was associated with the passage through the Protevangelium with its promise that the seed 111 Weiss (1910: 186) draws attention to the similarities between Gal 5:6, Gal 6:15 and 1 Cor 7:19. These verses express the same idea although with some variations. In his discussion of 1 Cor 7:19 Weiss points out that Gal 6:15 in the Euthalian list of testimonies is attributed to a lost Μωϋσέως ἀπόκρυφον. The Euthalian list describes it as the first (and only) quotation from this book in the Pauline letters. Weiss argues that Gal 6:15 may not present the quotation in a pure form, which he suggests rather may be found in 1 Cor 7:19. The reason for this is the absence of Christian elements in this version: ‘Es könnte genau so in dem jüdischen Apokryphon gestanden haben.’ David Hellholm brought to my attention this rare reference to the Euthalian apparatus in NT commentaries. 112 This was suggested to me by Nils A. Dahl. 113 R. A. Martin (1965: 427) suggested that an individual Messianic interpretation of Gen 3:15 is present already in the LXX, as the masculine pronoun αὐτός here represents the neuter σπέρμα in the preceding sentence. The Christological interpretation of σπέρμα is attested in the 2nd cent., as in Ireneus, Against Heresies, vi, 21, 1. 114 This is emphasized by G. von Rad (1981: 66): ‘Das Weib und der Mann sind nicht verflucht; (es ist gedankenlos, von ihrer “Verfluchung” zu reden!).’ 115 See G. J. Wenham (1987: 83), who refers to Gen 3:19 as a ‘curse’ and points out that most commentators consider the verse a confirmation of the death-threat in Gen 2:17.

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

153

would bruise116 the head of the snake. Thus the promise of Christ’s victory was embedded into the curse. In the Genesis text, God is the speaker, but there are sources who offer the interpretation that Christ was the speaker of the Protevangelium (and, by consequence, of the entire passage).117 It is difficult to decide whether the ὑπόθεσις goes this far. The words ‘through whom’ (δι᾽ οὗ) do not necessarily imply that Christ was the speaker; they may refer to Christ as the agent through whom the curse was effected. If this is the case, κατάρα would refer to the curse on the snake (the devil), not to the curse on man, since Christ is the agent only of the destruction of the devil. The possibility exists, however, that there is a confusion regarding these two curses in the ὑπόθεσις.118 And now, as a good house-steward, he comforts (παραμυθεῖται) on the one hand the Jews: ‘you do not become transgressors of the Law if you believe in Christ.’ Pre-text (Rom 9:31): Ἰσραὴλ δὲ διώκων νόμον δικαιοσύνης εἰς νόμον οὐκ ἔφθασεν Pre-text (Rom 10:9): ὅτι ἐὰν ὁμολογήσῃς ἐν τῷ στόματί σου κύριον Ἰησοῦν […] σωθήσῃ The ὑπόθεσις depicts Paul as a good house-steward comforting (παραμυθεῖται) the Jews. The comforting words are apparently based on o
ćF
аɀшϦϣϯϧ϶
NBLFT
1BVM
TBZ
to the Jews that they are not transgressors of the Law if they believe in Christ. This statement may be reached by combining 9:31 and 10:9, with the presupposition that the ‘you’ in 10:9 represents the Jew.119 In its treatment of Paul’s thought on the salvation of Israel, the ὑπόθεσις is quite selective: According to the pre-text, the stumbling of Israel resulted in the conversion of the Gentiles. Still, the election of Israel is valid (o
BOE
o 
The conversion of the Gentiles will make Israel jealous (11:11), and finally result in the conversion of Israel (o 
ćJT
EJWJOF
QMBO
XIJDI
JO
UIF
QSFUFYU
JT
SFGFSSFE
UP
BT
B
mystery (11:25) is not mentioned in the ὑπόθεσις at all. All that is left in the ὑπόθεσις is an appeal to the Jews for their conversion. On the other hand, he commands those from the Gentiles not to boast against Israel, but to understand that as branches upon the root, they were grafted onto them. Pre-text (Rom 11:18): μὴ κατακαυχῶ τῶν κλάδων· εἰ δὲ κατακαυχᾶσαι, οὐ σὺ τὴν ῥίζαν βαστάζεις ἀλλὰ ἡ ῥίζα σέ. The command to the Gentile Christians not to boast against Israel reflects o
JO
the pre-text. According to the pre-text, the Gentile Christians have, as a wild olive shoot, 116 Or, in Greek, τηρεῖν ‘guard, watch over.’ With the Christological interpretation a possible meaning would be: ‘guard as a prisoner’ cf. Rev 20:3. 117 On the idea that the pre-incarnate Christ spoke these words in Eden, see K. Schurb 1990: 32. 118 There is also a related idea in Pauline letters that is based on an exegesis of Deut 21:23: κεκατηραμένος ὑπὸ θεοῦ πᾶς κρεμάμενος ἐπὶ ξύλου, ‘cursed by God is everyone who is hanged on a tree.’ This passage (without the phrase ‘by God’) is part of the proof from Scripture in (BM
o
*O
UIJT
LJOE
PG
BSHVNFOU
Christ himself becomes the κατάρα (i.e., the accursed person or thing) for the sake of the believers and thus removes the ‘curse of the Law’ (Gal 3:13). This idea seems not to be reflected in the ὑπόθεσις. Possibly, it was difficult to reconcile with the idea of Christ himself as speaker of the curse. For a summary of this type of argument, see Priscillian (Can. LXVI): Quia in lege iudaica maledictum sit, de quo nos Christus liberat factus ipse maledictum. ‘That there is a curse in the Jewish law, from which Christ makes us free, having been made a curse himself.’ 119 This ὑπόθεσις seems to presuppose that the vocative ἀδελφοί in 10:1 refers to οἱ ἀδελφοί μου οἱ συγγενεῖς κατὰ σάρκα (9:3). This understanding is probably too narrow. Paul addresses the entire community in Rome, see Michel 1978: 324; Jewett 2007: 614.

154

Commentary

been grafted upon the olive tree, which represents the people of God. Some of the natural branches representing the Jews, who did not accept Christ, have been broken off. In the pre-text, a threat follows that God may break the wild shoot off in order to graft the natural branches in again (o 
ćJT
JT
OPU
SFQSPEVDFE
JO
UIF
аɀшϦϣϯϧ϶
ćF
JODMVTJPO
PG
this idea would have destroyed the logic of the ὑπόθεσις, where the Jewish practices are said to be abolished once and for all.120 Thus, the ὑπόθεσις offers at this point an idiosyncratic and incomplete summary of the pre-text. The image of the olive tree is preserved, but its original meaning has been altered. After that (ταῦτα), having taught exhortative words (παραινετικοὺς λόγους) in order to strengthen the morals, he ends the letter.

In the ὑπόθεσις, the abstract term ταῦτα refers to the command not to boast against Israel in 11:18 (see above). Thus, the παραινετικοὶ λόγοι probably begin at 12:1 with a παρακαλῶ sentence. It is, however, difficult to say where the ὑπόθεσις makes this section end. The use of the term παραινετικός corresponds to the use of ‘paraenetic’ in biblical scholarship.121 2.2.5. Hypothesis of 1 Corinthians He sends this letter from Ephesus in Asia (16:8), after having seen and taught them. Still, he reminds (ὑπομιμνήσκει) them through this letter.

That the letter was sent from Ephesus is based on 16:8.122 In contrast to Romans, this letter JT
XSJUUFO
UP
SFDJQJFOUT
XIP
IBE
CFFO
UBVHIU
CZ
1BVM
DG
o

 
ćJT
NBLFT
it belong to the group of letters where Paul reminds (ὑπομιμνῄσκει) those he had already seen.123 The occasion (πρόφασις) for the letter is this

The occasion is explained via reference to the main themes of the pre-text:124 The divisions in the community (o


UIF
DBTF
PG
GPSOJDBUJPO
o


UIF
NFO
XIP
XBOUFE
to leave their wives (o


UIF
GPPE
PČFSFE
UP
JEPMT
o


UIF
TQFBLJOH
JO
UPOHVFT
(o


BOE
UIF
NZTUFSZ
PG
SFTVSSFDUJPO
o 
ćFTF
UIFNFT
BQQFBS
JO
UIF
TBNF
order in the ὑπόθεσις and in the pre-text. In the ὑπόθεσις, they appear twice; first as a description of the occasion, then in the summary of the contents of the letter. Thus, it 120 E.g., ‘the sign comes to an end when what it signifies becomes reality’, in its summary of Rom 4. 121 See Hellholm/Blomkvist

o
"QQ
**
338o340). 122 Cf. the ‘Marcionite’ prologue: Hos revocat apostolus ad veram et evangelicam sapientiam, scribens eis ab Epheso. ‘The Apostle calls them back to the true wisdom of the Gospel, writing to them from Ephesus.’ (Text in Souter 1913: 206). So also Theodoret (Preface, PG 82: 37D, quoting 16:8) and Theophylact (Commentary, PG 124: 788B). The Byzantine subscription (see the letter ending in the N. A. edition) on the other hand, says that the letter was written at Philippi. This divergence shows that the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις are not dependent on the subscriptions that are found in most Byzantine manuscripts. 123 See above on the Διὰ τί. The ὑπομνηστική is one of the genres mentioned by Pseudo-Libanius: Ὑπομνηστικὴ δι᾽ ἧς δοκοῦμέν τινα τοῦ ζητουμένου πράγματος ἡμιν ὑπομιμνήσκειν τὸν σκοπὸν ἡμῶν ἐν αὐτῇ χαράττοντες. ‘The suggestive style is that in which we seem to make a suggestion to someone in response to an inquiry directed to us, while (actually) stamping it with our own aim. (De forma epistolari, 42. Transl. Malherbe 1988: 73). In their translations of Pseudo-Libanius, both A. J. Malherbe and M. Trapp (2003: 191) render ὑπομνηστική ‘suggestive.’ This seems to be the meaning of the word here, and thus the use of the term is quite different from that of the Euthalian ὑπόθεσις. 124 On the occasion of the pre-text, see M. M. Mitchell 1991.

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

155

seems clear that the ὑπόθεσις has reconstructed the communicative situation rather mechanically, by going through the pre-text and summarizing it. The ὑπόθεσις presupposes, as do all modern commentaries on the letter, that ‘the Corinthians’ refers to a Christian community within the large city of Corinth.125 In their love of strife, the Corinthians were opposed to each other, they differed in opinions, and there were now divisions among them (o . As there were divisions (ὄντων σχισμάτων), they did not act against the man living with his stepmother
o . Pre-text (1 Cor 5:2): καὶ ὑμεῖς πεφυσιωμένοι ἐστέ, καὶ οὐχὶ μᾶλλον ἐπενθήσατε, ἵνα ἀρθῇ ἐκ μέσου ὑμῶν ὁ τὸ ἔργον τοῦτο πράξας; The ὑπόθεσις goes, however, beyond merely listing the themes, it also establishes a link between them. The ὑπόθεσις discerns a link between the divisions and the case of fornication. The genitive absolute construction (ὄντων σχισμάτων) probably expresses cause: The divisions had made the Corinthians overlook the man who lived with his stepmother. The interpretation has a basis in 5:2. Here, the ὑπόθεσις has understood (1) πεφυσιωμένοι ἐστέ as referring to the divisions within the community, and (2) the following καὶ οὐχὶ μᾶλλον ἐπενθήσατε, ἵνα κτλ as describing a consequence of the preceding situation. That the interpretation of πεφυσιωμένοι refer to the divisions is understandable. The term is used in this context in 4:6, ἵνα μὴ εἷς ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἑνὸς φυσιοῦσθε κατὰ τοῦ ἑτέρου.126 More remarkable is the view that the divisions somehow had caused the Corinthians to overlook the error among them. The ὑπόθεσις seems to use the divisions as an apologetic argument, although it is not said explicitly: The Corinthians were distracted by their internal strife, and this is why they could overlook such a serious sin.127 Others wished to leave their wives, apparently for the sake of continence (ἐγκράτεια). Pre-text (
$PS
o 
ϰϭѴ϶
Ϣс
ϡϣϡϟϪϥϨшϯϧϫ
ɀϟϮϟϡϡтϩϩϵ
ϭЯϨ
Гϡы
Ћϩϩп
Ъ
ϨъϮϧϭ϶
γυναῖκα ἀπὸ ἀνδρὸς μὴ χωρισθῆναι […] καὶ ἄνδρα γυναῖκα μὴ ἀφιέναι. Another aspect of the occasion of the letter is that some of the Corinthians wished to leave their wives. This wish is probably constructed on the basis of 7:11; the order not to divorce presupposes according to the ὑπόθεσις that some of the Corinthians wanted 125 Commentators of later times may however be confused regarding the size of the Christian community at the time Paul wrote the letter. Interestingly, Theophylact (ὑπόθεσις, PG 124: 560BC) uses a language that seems rather to reflect the state of affairs when he wrote the commentary: He can say that ‘Corinth’ had believed in Christ, and that Paul ‘writes to the city.’ (γράφει τοίνυν ὁ Παῦλος τῇ πόλει). This has significance for the interpretation of the letter, since the church and the city thus become more closely associated in the mind of the commentator. The situation in the Christian community is supposed to be somehow related to the general ‘character’ of the city. Thus, the ὑπόθεσις of Theophylact suggests that the opulence of the city of Corinth is represented by the rich members of the community who separated themselves from the rest. This type of exegesis, which is based on popular traditions about the ancient cities (see also Theophylact, ὑπόθεσις of Eph), is not found in the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις. 126 For the interpretation of this statement in relation to the divisions at Corinth, see G. Fee

o
A. C. Thiselton 2000: 355. 127 For a similar interpretation (though focusing on the pride of the Corinthians), see Fee (1987: 202): ‘Whatever the actual relationship of their pride to incest, it has blinded them both to the fallen brother’s true condition and to their own.’ A. Clarke

7*

JT
DMPTFS
UP
UIF
JOUFSQSFUBUJPO
PG
UIF
аɀшϦϣϯϧ϶
A:F
are full of strife and contention relative to your parties and favourite teachers, and neglect the discipline of the Church.’

156

Commentary

divorce. It is worth noting that the ὑπόθεσις mentions only the wish of the husbands, not the wives (cf. 7:10). That the men wanted divorce for the sake of continence is not said explicitly in the letter, but may be based on the immediately preceding words in the pretext: εἰ δὲ οὐκ ἐγκρατεύονται, γαμησάτωσαν (7:9). And first, he bears witness (μαρτυρεῖ) to their prudence (φρόνησις) and wisdom (γνῶσις) Pre-text (
$PS
o 
ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰҀ
ϰҁ
Ϧϣҁ
Ϫϭϱ
ɀрϫϰϭϰϣ
ɀϣϮх
аϪҀϫ
Гɀх
ϰѯ
ϳрϮϧϰϧ
ϰϭѼ
ϦϣϭѼ
τῇ δοθείσῃ ὑμῖν ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, ὅτι ἐν παντὶ ἐπλουτίσθητε ἐν αὐτῷ, ἐν παντὶ λόγῳ καὶ πάσῃ γνώσει, καθὼς τὸ μαρτύριον τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐβεβαιώθη ἐν ὑμῖν As in the ὑπόθεσις of Rom, the ἐυχαριστῶ of the pre-text is replaced by another metacommunicative verb, here μαρτυρέω. Here, the change may be justified by the adverb πάντοτε: The ἐυχαριστῶ in 1:4 may not refer to the pre-text, but to other, text-external, thanksgivings.128 Not only the meta-communicative verb is changed in the ὑπόθεσις. In the pre-text, the Corinthians are described as rich in every λόγος and γνῶσις. The corresponding terms in the ὑπόθεσις are φρόνησις and γνῶσις. The reason for this change may be stylistic: The text that immediately follows in the ὑπόθεσις says that the Corinthians should esteem virtue not according to word (ἐν λόγῳ) but according to deed and power (ἐν ἔργῳ καὶ δυνάμει). The phrase ἐν παντὶ λόγῳ (1:4) was probably replaced in the ὑπόθεσις with ἐν φρονήσει to avoid a confusion between the expression ἐν παντὶ ϩшϡѾ
XIFSF
ϩшϡѾ
JT
VTFE
JO
QPTJUJWF
TFOTF
BOE
UIF
ϩшϡѾ
o
ЗϮϡѾ
PQQPTJUJPO
#FTJEFT
the term φρόνησις may be the preferred term in the ὑπόθεσις because it can be used in a paraenetic context, while this is not normally the case with λόγος.129 Because they love chastity (ἐγκράτεια), he writes to them on virginity (περὶ παρθενίας), that it should be not by force (κατ᾽ ἀνάγκην), but by conviction (πειθοῖ). Pre-text (
$PS
o 
Ь϶
Ϣс
ИϯϰϥϨϣϫ
Гϫ
ϰѯ
ϨϟϮϢцѨ
ϟЯϰϭѼ
ДϢϮϟѴϭ϶
Ϫу
Зϳϵϫ
ЋϫрϡϨϥϫ
ἐξουσίαν δὲ ἔχει περὶ τοῦ ἰδίου θελήματος, καὶ τοῦτο κέκρικεν ἐν τῇ ἰδίᾳ καρδίᾳ, τηρεῖν τὴν ἑαυτοῦ παρθένον, καλῶς ποιεῖ The ὑπόθεσις describes the Corinthians as people who love chastity. Thus, the ὑπόθεσις has probably taken 7:1 καλὸν ἀνθρώπῳ γυναικὸς μὴ ἅπτεσθαι as a quotation from the letter of the Corinthians to Paul, or at least as a statement reflecting their view on the subject.130 The passage that is paraphrased in the ὑπόθεσις, is 7:37.131 The following aspects of the ὑπόθεσις is worth noting: (1) The ὑπόθεσις does not speak of a ‘virgin’, as in the pretext, but uses only the abstract noun παρθενία.132 Since the ὑπόθεσις treats the pre-text in 128 Thiselton (2000: 87), on the other hand, considers it primarily as ‘a speech act of giving thanks’, which also can operate on other levels (e.g. it may have a didactic function). 129 This was suggested to me by David Hellholm. 130 On this interpretation of 7:1, see W. Schrage 1995: 53, who also quotes Tertullian (De monogamia, 11, 6) as an early advocate of this view. Both Theodoret (Commentary, PG 82: 272A) and Theophylact (Commentary, PG 124: 640A) ascribe the words to Paul. According to Theophylact, the Corinthians had asked Paul the following question: εἰ δεῖ γυναικὸς ἀπέχεσθαι, ἢ οὔ, ‘should a man stay away from women or not?’ ćBU
UIFSF
XFSF
BTDFUJD
FMFNFOUT
JO
$PSJOUI
JT
BMTP
FWJEFOU
GSPN
o
TFF
Conzelmann 1981: 146f. n. 11; D. Zeller 2010: 237f. 131 This is seen from the opposition κατ᾽ ἀνάγκην / πειθοῖ, which is clearly an echo of 7:37. 132 Thus the thematic marker περὶ παρθενίας in the ὑπόθεσις correspond to περὶ […] τῶν παρθένων in the pre-text (7:25).

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

157

this way, it is impossible to know exactly how it understood the difficult phrase τηρεῖν τὴν ἑαυτοῦ παρθένον.133 (2) The ὑπόθεσις has reproduced the term ἀνάγκη from the pre-text, and understands it as a reference to an external compulsion to live in abstinence.134 The ὑπόθεσις shows no ascetic tendency.135 And in the end he writes exhortative words (παραινετικοὶ λόγοι) in order to strengthen the morals.

Dahl has pointed out that παραινετικοὶ λόγοι probably refer to a single verse (15:58) in the pre-text, and that the language of the ὑπόθεσις here is influenced by the idea that the Pauline letters normally ended with paraenesis.136 2.2.6. Hypothesis of 2 Corinthians He sends this one from Macedonia Pre-text (2 Cor 9:2a): οἶδα γὰρ τὴν προθυμίαν ὑμῶν ἣν ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν καυχῶμαι Μακεδόσιν The ὑπόθεσις is here based on the pre-text, where Paul says that he boasts (presently) to UIF
.BDFEPOJBOT
PG
UIF
DPNNJUNFOU
PG
UIF
"DIBFBOT
DG
BMTP

o 137 Macedonia is also mentioned in 1 Cor 16:5 as a region Paul later will pass through.138 The Corinthians were distressed after they had received the previous letter, because of the sin of him who had lived with his stepmother, and they were grieved because they had overlooked such an error.

133 This phrase may refer to the man keeping his fiancée a virgin, i.e. that he does not marry her. For this view, see Fee

o 
Schrage (1995: 202); Lindemann (2000: 182) and Zeller

o
"
completely different interpretation is found in Clarke

7*
o
XIP
BSHVFT
UIBU
ɀϟϮϦтϫϭ϶
JO
7:37 means παρθενία, here referring to the man’s virginity. This would explain the great emphasis put on the personal will of the man in the pre-text. 134 For ἀνάγκη as referring to external compulsion, see Fee 1987: 353. Fee thinks that Paul here refers to compulsion from both sides (from Corinthian ascetics and from Paul himself). Another possible interpretation is that an inner compulsion is meant, and that ἀνάγκη here = πάθος. For this interpretation, see Schrage 1995: 202 n. 853. 135 According to Dahl (2000d: 266, n. 143) there are practically no ascetic tendencies in the Euthalian material. The pre-text (1 Cor 7) was open to such interpretations. If we turn to the Canones of Priscillian, the ascetic ideal plays a greater part: Quia sanctorum corpora dei sive spiritus sancti templa et Christi membra sint et ideo semper hostia viva et placens esse debeant atque ab omni opere carnis et a susurratione et vaniloquio ceterisque peccatis abstinere se debeant et ut uirgines iuxta apostoli consilium sic permaneant (Can. XXXIII, Schepss 1889: 124). ‘That the bodies of the saints are temples of God or of the Holy Spirit and members of Christ, and for this reason always a living sacrifice and should be pleasing and abstain from all the deeds of the flesh and from whispering and empty talk and that virgins according to the judgment of the Apostle should remain so.’ 136 See Dahl 2000d: 265; Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004: 512 (App. II, page 338). 137 See Clarke 1857: VI, 302. Clarke thinks that Macedonia as the place of composition is most clearly JNQMJFE
JO
o
$MBSLF
EPFT
EJTDVTT
UIF
QPTTJCJMJUZ
UIBU

$PS
JT
B
DPNQPTJUF
EPDVNFOU
&WFO
JG
UIJT
JT
assumed, Macedonia may still be considered the place of writing, see e.g. Furnish (1984: 46) on the origin PO
A-FUUFS
%
DIT
o
BOE
A-FUUFS
&
DIT
o  138 On the differences between the travel plans in 
$PS
o
BOE

$PS
o
TFF
Windisch

o
The Byzantine subscription is more specific than the Euthalian ὑπόθεσις, showing Philippi as the place of composition, sometimes with the addition τῆς Μακεδονίας; see the letter ending in the N. A. edition. Theodoret (Preface, PG 82: 40A) also refers to the letter as written from Macedonia.

158

Commentary

The idea is based on o
BOE
o
XIFSF
1BVM
TBZT
UIBU
UIF
HSJFG
PG
UIF
$PSJOUIJans was caused by a letter Paul wrote to make the Corinthians react against an offender among them. The nature of his offense is not explained in the pre-text. The ὑπόθεσις has identified the offender with the man who lived with his step-mother (
$PS
o 
ćJT
common identification is first attested by Tertullian, who rejected it.139 Modern commentators agree that the identification is false and that there were two different cases: In 1 Cor 5, Paul had demanded the expulsion of the offender from the community (1 Cor 5:5), IFSF
IF
BTLT
UIF
$PSJOUIJBOT
UP
GPSHJWF
UIF
PČFOEFS

$PS
o 
#FTJEFT
UIF
PČFOTFT
cannot be identified, as the crime of incest referred to in 1 Cor was not a crime directed against the person of Paul, which was clearly the case with the offense referred to in 2 $PS
o140 Then, they were also carried away by those who had caused the divisions, to sit down beside the letter of the Law, consider the grace from Christ unimportant, and rather attend people who boast of their appearance (τοῖς ἐν προσώπῳ καυχωμένοις).

The opponents of Paul are described as those who had caused the divisions, obviously with reference to 1 Cor. Thus, according to the ὑπόθεσις, Paul is fighting against the same opponents in the two Corinthian letters. There is no clear basis for this identification in the pre-text.141 The description of the opponents is probably based on the following passages in the pre-text: (1) 11:22, where Paul describes them as Hebrews and Israelites. (2) o
XIFSF
UIF
0ME
BOE
UIF
/FX
$PWFOBOU
BSF
DPOUSBTUFE


XIFSF
UIFZ
BSF
described as οἱ ἐν προσώπῳ καυχώμενοι. Then, [he says] that because Christ has come (τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐλθόντος), there is a new creation (καινὴ κτίσις), and one should not live after the old order (κατὰ τὸ παλαιόν), but be renewed in everything as in a new creation (ἐν καινῇ κτίσει), and that circumcision from now on is useless. Pre-text (2 Cor 5:17): ὥστε εἴ τις ἐν Χριστῷ, καινὴ κτίσις· τὰ ἀρχαῖα παρῆλθεν, ἰδοὺ γέγονεν καινά In 5:17, the focus is on the individual believer. The words καινὴ κτίσις is also used of an individual being, the one who is in Christ.142 The ὑπόθεσις has transformed this into a general statement, using κτίσις in a collective sense. This interpretation is not an important deviation from the pre-text, as the central motive of the change from the old to the new, is retained in the ὑπόθεσις. The interpretation, however, has some implications for the other elements: The words ἐν Χριστῷ, which in the pre-text probably refer to the unification of the believer with Christ through baptism, are in the ὑπόθεσις represented by a statement focusing on the historical event (τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐλθόντος). This focus on history

139 See Tertullian, De pudicitia
o
5FSUVMMJBO
JT
SFGFSSFE
UP
CZ
Windisch 1924: 9 as the only theologian in the Early Church who rejected this identification. 140 For this discussion, see Windisch

o


Bultmann

o


Furnish

o


BOE
M. E. Thrall

o  141 For an overview of this discussion, see Hellholm 2008: 288. 142 Bultmann (1976: 159): ‘Hier wie Gal 6,15 deutlich auf das Individuum bezogen […]’. Thus also the KJV, ‘he is a new creature.’

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

159

instead of the individual makes it possible for the ὑπόθεσις to include a reference to the abolishment of circumcision which is not found in the pre-text.143 … he ends the letter in thanksgiving (ἐν εὐχαριστίᾳ) Pre-text (2 Cor 13:13): ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἡ κοινωνία τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν The designation εὐχαριστία in the ὑπόθεσις for 13:13 is puzzling but it seems reasonably clear that this is the pre-text that is being referred to.144 Modern commentators tend to designate this verse with the term ‘benediction’, not ‘thanksgiving’.145 The use of the metaterm εὐχαριστία is also remarkable in view of the fact that the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις in general avoid using εὐχαριστία/εὐχαριστέω. These meta-terms are not even used where one should expect them: in the paraphrase of the Pauline thanksgiving periods.146 Neither is the term εὐχαριστία used elsewhere in the ὑπόθεσις with reference to other benedictions that appear at the end of the Pauline letters.147 There should therefore be a special reason for its use here. The answer may be found in the special character of the pre-text. Commentators have pointed out that the benediction in 13:13 stands out from the other benedictions that conclude Paul’s letters. Its outstanding features are both its length and its triadic structure.148 Windisch describes it as a Trinitarian formula,149 and one may assume that this feature has contributed to its unique treatment in the ὑποθέσεις. Possibly, the elaborate benediction was associated with the celebration of the Eucharist, and so the word εὐχαριστία may be employed for Eucharistic prayers or blessings.150

143 Cf. Priscillian (Can. LXVII): Quia per spiritalem cordis in Christo circumcisionem propudiosam illam legis destruat apostolus. ‘That the Apostle through the spiritual circumcision of the heart in Christ abolishes the shameless circumcision of the Law.’ 144
"DDPSEJOH
UP
UIF
аɀшϦϣϯϧ϶
1BVM
IBWJOH
EFTDSJCFE
IJT
WJTJPOT
JO
1BSBEJTF

o


PSEFST
UIBU
TJOOFST
should repent ( = 13:2) before he ends (τελειοῖ) the letter in thanksgiving. The εὐχαριστία should therefore be sought after 13:2 and in the end of the letter, and this leaves few other choices than 13:13. 145 See Doty 1973: 43; Furnish 1984: 587. German Segenswunsch (see e.g. Windisch 1924: 427). It is also possible to consider the form a prayer. This is the opinion of Theophylact (Commentary, PG 124: 952A) on this passage: Ἐπειδὴ συνῆψεν ἅπαντας, ἐπεύχεται αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸ εἰωθὸς, τὴν χάριν τοῦ Υἱοῦ, δι᾽ ἧς ἔσωσεν ἡμᾶς, ‘When he has united them all, he prays, according to his habit, for the grace of the Son, through whom He saved us.’ It is worth noting that Theophylact describes this as a regular feature of the Pauline letters. 146 Cf. the commentary. This is one of the most conspicuous differences between the Euthalian ὑπόθεσις and κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, see especially the Resumé of the present commentary. 147 Rom 16:20; 1 Cor 16:23; Gal 6:18; Eph 6:24; Phil 4:23; Col 4:18b; 1 Thess 5:28; 2 Thess 3:18; 1 Tim 6:21b; 2 Tim 4:22b; Tit 3:15b; Philem 1:25; Heb 13:25. 148 Furnish (1984: 587) finds that only the elaborate benedictory form of Eph 5:23 can be compared to 2 Cor 13:13. 149 See Windisch

o
Thrall (2000: 920) maintains the view that the word ‘trinitarian’ if used for this benediction, should not imply a doctrine of the Trinity but that the benediction rather represents ‘one of the starting points of trinitarian development.’ 150 See Lampe (s.v. εὐχαριστία B.1). The reference to the ‘holy kiss’ in 13:12 may also be associated with the Eucharist, see Furnish 1984: 583. The Euthalian ὑποθέσεις are, however, for the most part uninterested in the liturgical elements in the Pauline letters, see the Resumé of the present commentary.

160

Commentary

2.2.7. Hypothesis of Galatians He sends this letter from Rome, after he has seen and taught them.

Rome is not mentioned in the pre-text, but the ὑπόθεσις here agrees with the Byzantine subscription.151 Both the ὑποθέσεις and these subscriptions often name Rome as the place of composition, and their motivation for doing this is not always clear. One may conjecture that the ὑπόθεσις has understood Paul’s words on his στίγματα (6:17) as a reference to scars received from mistreatment in prison, and that this has associated Gal with the group of Imprisonment Letters. And first (καὶ πρῶτον), he bears witness (μαρτυρεῖ) to their faith and their true conviction of Christ. But he rebukes (μέμφεται) them for acting unwisely and for changing their minds Pre-text (Gal 1:6): θαυμάζω ὅτι οὕτως ταχέως μετατίθεσθε ἀπὸ τοῦ καλέσαντος ὑμᾶς ἐν χάριτι Χριστοῦ εἰς ἕτερον εὐαγγέλιον The verb θαυμαζω is not reflected in the ὑπόθεσις, which describes the beginning of the pre-text with the meta-communicative verbs μαρτυρεῖ and μέμφεται: Thus, the ὑπόθεσις seems to place the testimony before the rebuke. It is not quite clear what the ὑπόθεσις here refers to. The words ἀπὸ τοῦ καλέσαντος ὑμᾶς ἐν χάριτι Χριστοῦ may be understood as a reference to the faith and true conviction of the Galatians, but the ὑπόθεσις gives this theme greater prominence by the juxtaposition of μαρτυρεῖ and μέμφεται. Possibly, some other passage of the pre-text underlies this passage of the ὑπόθεσις.152 In a paraphrase PG
UIF
CFHJOOJOH
PG
UIF
QSFUFYU
POF
TIPVME
FYQFDU
UIBU
UIF
OBSSBUJWF
PG
(BM
o
TIPVME
be referred to. This is however not the case. This narrative in the pre-text is related to the accusations against Paul’s person and these accusations are not mentioned in the ὑπόθεσις at all.153 … that the shadow and the circumcision were given until a certain time, and that they since the coming (παρουσία) of Christ are useless Pre-text (Gal 5:6): ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε ἀκροβυστία, ἀλλὰ πίστις δι’ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη Pre-text (Gal 6:15): οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε ἀκροβυστία, ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις154 151 Πρὸς Γαλάτας ἐγράφη ἀπὸ Ῥώμης ‘The Letter to the Galatians was written from Rome’, see the letter ending in the N. A. edition. So also Theodoret (Commentary, PG 82: 504D). The ‘Marcionite’ prologue, on the other hand, has Ephesus, see Souter 1913: 205. Ephesus is considered also by modern commentators, see H. Schlier 1962: 18; A. Oepke

o
H. D. Betz (1979: 12) notes the agreement between the ‘Marcionite’ prologue and most modern scholars with regard to the place of composition, but points out that the sources both of this prologue and of the Byzantine subscription are unknown to us. 152 E.g., οὕτως ἀνόητοί ἐστε; ἐναρξάμενοι πνεύματι νῦν σαρκὶ ἐπιτελεῖσθε (3:3). The ὑπόθεσις may also be influenced by other Pauline letters, where praise of the recipients may occur in the thanksgiving period. 153 The ὑποθέσεις of Theodoret (PG o
BOE
ćFPQIZMBDU
PG 
o
EJČFS
GSPN
UIF
&Vthalian ὑπόθεσις by including the motive that Paul himself, not only his teaching, was slandered by his opponents in Galatia. According to Theophylact, they accused Paul of being a disciple of the Apostles, not of the Lord. Another accusation was that of unstableness, that Paul sometimes practiced circumcision, sometimes not: τὸ ποτὲ μὲν περιτέμνειν, ποτὲ δὲ ἀναιρεῖν τὴν περιτομήν (ὑπόθεσις of Gal, PG 124: 953B). This perspective on the conflict in Galatia involves the use of Acts (cf. Acts 16:3). It also represents a stronger interest in historical detail than the Euthalian ὑπόθεσις. 154 Gal 6:15 is mentioned elsewhere in the apparatus: In the Euthalian list of testimonies the verse is attributed to a lost Μωϋσέως ἀπόκρυφον and it is recorded as the first (and only) quotation from this book in the

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

161

The ὑπόθεσις here corresponds both to 5:6 and 6:15. It is hardly possible to decide which of the two is closest to the ὑπόθεσις. The pre-text has in any case been modified, and this makes an exact identification difficult. The following points are worth noting: (1) The ἐν Χριστῷ formula in 5:6 is apparently interpreted as referring to the first coming (παρουσία) of Christ (cf. the interpretation of 2 Cor 5:17). (2) The pre-text argues that neither circumcision nor uncirumcision means anything.155 The words on uncircumcision are omitted from the ὑπόθεσις, thus only the negative evaluation of circumcision remains. (3) The ὑπόθεσις introduces the term σκιά, which is not in the pre-text. Here it is apparently used as a metaphor for the Law. These changes alter the meaning of the pretext. While the pre-text emphasizes the insignificance of all external circumstances for those in Christ (cf. 3:28), the ὑπόθεσις again focuses on the abolishment of circumcision and the Jewish Law through the coming of Christ. It should also be noted that the entire structure of the argument has been changed: In the pre-text, there is a contrast between the insignificant outer appearances on the one hand, and the καινὴ κτίσις (5:6) or the ἀγάπη ἐνεργουμένη (6:15), on the other. In the ὑπόθεσις, these are left out. 2.2.8. Hypothesis of Ephesians He sends this letter from Rome, while he has not yet seen them, but heard about them

That the letter is sent from Rome has no basis in the pre-text. Dahl pointed out that the statement is in conflict with the story of Paul in Acts, where Paul arrives in Ephesus before his voyage to Rome ("DUT
o 
3PNF
BT
UIF
QMBDF
PG
DPNQPTJUJPO
JT
NFOUJPOFE
in the Byzantine subscription and Dahl suggested that this is the source of the ὑπόθεσις.156 The answer to this question may also be found in the pre-text. Eph belongs to the socalled imprisonment letters (Eph, Phil, Col, 2 Tim, Philem) and the ὑποθέσεις refer to all of them as written in Rome, presupposing that they refer to his imprisonment in that city.157 That Paul had not met the Ephesians when he wrote the letter, is clear from the pre-text (cf. 1:15; 3:2). The conflict with the narrative of Acts is not remarkable in itself: In the first centuries there was no canonical account of Paul’s life, and even if the text of Pauline letters; see hereto the notification in Weiss 1910: 186. David Hellholm brought this reference to my attention. 155 Betz (1979: 262) translates 5:6 ‘for in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything’, similarly Schlier (1962: 228). A slightly different understanding of 5:6 is found in Oepke (1973: 158): ‘Der Sinn ist: die Beschneidung nützt nicht, und die Unbeschnittenheit schadet nicht.’ 156 See Dahl 1978/2000: 202, n. 105. The Byzantine subscription runs as follows: Πρὸς Ἐφεσίους ἐγράφη ἀπὸ Ῥώμης διὰ Τυχίκου, see the letter ending in the N. A. edition. 157 Cf. the ‘Marcionite’ prologue describes the Letter to the Laodiceans (= Eph) as written while Paul was a prisoner in Rome: Hos conlaudat apostolos, scribens eis a Roma de carcere. ‘The Apostle praises them, writing to them from prison in Rome.’ (Text in Souter 1913: 206). This prologue may, however, not belong to the original set, where Paul’s letters to the churches in Asia (in Laodicea and Colossae) probably both were assigned to Ephesus. For arguments supporting this view, see Dahl

o
ćFPEPSFU
assigns the letter to Rome (Preface, PG 82: 42C), and also Theophylact (ὑπόθεσις of Eph, PG 124: 1033A): Γράφει δὲ τὴν τῶν ὑπερόγκων νοημάτων ταύτην γέμουσαν Ἐπιστολὴν ἀπὸ Ῥώμης δεδεμένος. ‘He writes the letter, which is full of sublime thoughts, from Rome, as a prisoner.’ Both Rome and Caesarea have frequently been mentioned by commentators, see P. Pokorný 1992: 42; E. Best

o
&WFO
JG
&QI
is considered a pseudonymous letter, Rome may still be the ficticious place of composition implied in the pre-text, see G. Sellin 2008: 491.

162

Commentary

Acts was known, it was not absolutely necessary to accept its itinerary.158 The Euthalian ὑποθέσεις apparently use the text of Acts elsewhere (in the ὑπόθεσις of 1 Thess, see below), but neglect it here.159 They truly had faith in Him and love for all the saints and they wanted to be strengthened (βεβαιωθῆναι) by Paul

The true faith of the Ephesians reflects the pre-text (cf. 1:15 κἀγὼ ἀκούσας τὴν καθ᾽ ὑμᾶς πίστιν ἐν τῷ κυρίῳ ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ), but their wish to be strengthened by Paul is a motive that seems to belong to the ὑπόθεσις alone. It is, however, possible to arrive at this conclusion by examining the pre-text: (1) In 6:22, Paul is said to have sent Tychikus to the Ephesians with a twin purpose, to make the Ephesians know about his present circumstances, and to encourage (παρακαλέω) their hearts. The meaning of παρακαλεῖν may here be close to βεβαιόω.160 These words relate to the letter carrier, but may reasonably be applied to the message of the letter as well.161 (2) There is a possibility that the ὑπόθεσις here uses a similar technique as the ὑπόθεσις of 1 Cor, where the communicative situation was reconstructed by referring to what Paul does in the letter. Paul had written to the Corinthians partly as a response to their enquiries, and the needs of the Corinthian community emerge clearly, upon reading. One may therefore conjecture that the ὑπόθεσις of Eph here may be based on some specific passage in its pre-text. The theme of strengthening is found in 3:16, where Paul prays that the Ephesians may be strengthened (here: κραταιωθῆναι) with the power of God through the Spirit: ἵνα δῷ ὑμῖν κατὰ τὸ πλοῦτος τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ δυνάμει κραταιωθῆναι διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸν ἔσω ἄνθρωπον. The ὑπόθεσις describes this in a typical manner: Paul’s strengthening of the Ephesians is in the pre-text effected through prayer, but this is not mentioned here. Neither does the ὑπόθεσις say how the wish of the Ephesians was communicated to Paul. He writes this letter to them as a catechetical letter (κατηχητικὴ ἐπιστολή)

In the typology of the ὑποθέσεις, the genre of Eph is the catechetical letter.162 Thus it is both similar to and different from Romans, which is described as a didactic letter. In the 158 Dahl (1978/2000: 202) uses the Acts of Paul as an example: The author of this book made use of the canonical Acts, but the story of Paul’s travels is quite different. 159 By contrast, Theodoret (ὑπόθεσις of Eph, PG

o
QBSBQISBTFT
"DUT
VTJOH
UIF
UFYU
PG
"DUT
BT
BO
argument against the view that Paul had not yet seen the Ephesians when he wrote the letter. 160 Cf. Pokorný (1992: 250) ‘Παρακαλεῖν »ermutigen oder ermahnen« ist ein typisches Verb der Paränese und drückt sowohl Ermutigung als auch Ermahnung aus.’ Best (1998: 617) argues that the verb here should not be taken in the technical sense it has in 4:1 and he refers to Tychikus as sent ‘to strengthen the members of the community.’ If this interpretation is adopted, 6:22 may well be considered the basis for the ὑπόθεσις. 161 On the possibility of a close relationship between the message and its carrier, see Best (1998: 617): ‘He [i.e. Tychicus] will in effect continue what the letter itself is intended to achieve.’ 162 This genre-designation is different from the description found in Theophylact (ὑπόθεσις of Eph, PG 124: 1033A), who thinks that Paul in this letter entrusted both deeper and more exalted truths to the readers than he did elsewhere ‘because they were already instructed in the Christian faith’ (ἅτε κατηχημένοις ἤδη). This interpretation seems to be based on his image of the city of Ephesus (ὑπόθεσις of Eph, PG 124: 1033A): Ἐπεὶ οὖν δεισιδαίμων τε ἦν οὕτως ἡ πόλις, καὶ οὕτω σοφοῖς ἐκόμα, πολλῇ σπουδῇ κέχρηται Παῦλος πρὸς τοὺς τοιούτους γράφων […].‘Since the city was so religious and had a multitude of wise people, Paul spends great effort in writing to them […].’ This is a parallel to the method Theophylact uses in the ὑπόθεσις of 1 Cor: There is a tendency to view the Christian community as typical of the city to which it belonged. The Euthalian ὑπόθεσις does not use this method.

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

163

Διὰ τί, the verbs κατηχέω and διδάσκω are closely related. Both are used with reference to recipients that Paul had not seen (see above). It should be noted that the catechetical letter Eph has a prophasis section in contrast to the didactic letters. And he declares that our call has not come through a man, but through Christ, who is the Son of God, so that they also from this may learn that they as believers in Christ do not pay homage to a man (ἀνθρωπολάτραι), but that they truly worship God (θεοσεβεῖς) Pre-text (&QI
o 
ϭТ
ϢϭѼϩϭϧ
аɀϟϨϭъϣϰϣ
ϰϭѴ϶
Ϩϟϰп
ϯрϮϨϟ
ϨϱϮцϭϧ϶


Ϫу
Ϩϟϰ‫
ڍ‬ ὀφθαλμοδουλίαν ὡς ἀνθρωπάρεσκοι ἀλλ’ ὡς δοῦλοι Χριστοῦ ποιοῦντες τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ, ἐκ ψυχῆς (7) μετ’ εὐνοίας δουλεύοντες, ὡς τῷ κυρίῳ καὶ οὐκ ἀνθρώποις The statement that the call has not come through a man is not to be found in the pre-text, at least not in this pointed form. Also the terms ἀνθρωπολάτραι and θεοσεβεῖς represent a problem as they are not found in the pre-text. Dahl suggested that this statement in the ὑπόθεσις may be related to the Christological controversies of the 4th and 5th centuries. The term ἀνθρωπολάτραι was used against the Arians and later against the Nestorians.163 The theme is not elaborated further in the Euthalian apparatus.164 This passage of the ὑπόθεσις has some basis in the pre-text: (1) The term ἀνθρωπολάτραι has a counterpart in the ἀνθρωπάρεσκοι in 6:6. The verb ἀρέσκω ‘to please’ may be used with God as an object (Rom 8:8; 1 Thess 2:15), and the opposition between ‘pleasing men’ and ‘pleasing God’ is emphasized in the Pauline letters (Gal 1:10; 1 Thess 2:15).165 In view of this, the transformation of ἀνθρωπάρεσκοι into ἀνθρωπολάτραι is conceivable. (2) The term θεοσεβεῖς seems to render ‘the servants of Christ’ (δοῦλοι Χριστοῦ, 6:6) who are serving (δουλεύοντες, 6:7) with cheerfulness. Both the noun δοῦλος and the verb δουλεύω may be used of one who worships God. If this sense is presupposed the opposition in the ὑπόθεσις between ἀνθρωπολάτραι and θεοσεβεῖς is very close to 6:7 (δουλεύοντες … κυρίῳ … ἀνθρώποις). One objection may be raised against this interpretation of the ὑπόθεσις: This passage in the pre-text does not focus on Christians in general but is rather an admonition to Christian slaves on how to behave. It is however no serious difficulty for the ὑποθέσεις. Elsewhere, the ὑποθέσεις may use a fragment of the pre-text without paying any attention to its context.166 This allows for a radical reinterpretation. The ὑπόθεσις IBT
BQQBSFOUMZ
VTFE
o
BT
SBX
NBUFSJBM
GPS
FYQSFTTJOH
BOPUIFS
NPSF
HFOFSBM
JEFB167

163 See Dahl 2000d: 263, with references. 164 This is in contrast to the so-called Confession of Euthalius (see the Introduction) where an advanced technical vocabulary is found. 165 This connection is made by Theophylact (Commentary, PG 124: 1124C), who quotes Gal 1:10 to throw light on Eph 6:6, Ὁ ἀνθρωπάρεσκος οὐ δοῦλος τοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὥσπερ καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ λέγει· »Εἰ ἀνθρώποις ἤρεσκον, Χριστοῦ δοῦλος οὐκ ἂν ἤμην«. ‘The men-pleaser is not a servant of Christ, as he also says elsewhere: “If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ”. 166 An example of this is found in the ὑπόθεσις of 2 Thess, where words from the paraenetic section of the letter are used to describe the opponents of Paul in Thessalonice, see below. 167 If this is the case, it is unnecessary to ask how the ὑπόθεσις has understood ὡς τῷ κυρίῳ (6:7). The particle ὡς relates serving the human master with serving the Lord, and this idea is completely lost in the ὑπόθεσις.

164

Commentary

2.2.9. Hypothesis of Philippians He sends this letter from Rome

This is not stated explicitly in the pre-text but is the common opinion found in almost all ancient commentaries. This idea is related to Phil as one of the imprisonment letters. (4:22).168 Besides, Rome may have been suggested by the phrases ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ πραιτωρίῳ (1:13) and the reference to οἱ ἐκ τῆς καίσαρος οἰκίας (4:22).169 And first, he praises (ἀποδέχεται) their faith and announces (σημαίνει) that he remembers them Pre-text (1IJM
o

ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰҀ
ϰҁ
Ϧϣҁ
Ϫϭϱ
Гɀх
ɀрϯѬ
ϰѯ
ϪϫϣцѨ
аϪҀϫ
ɀрϫϰϭϰϣ
Гϫ
πάσῃ δεήσει μου ὑπὲρ πάντων ὑμῶν, μετὰ χαρᾶς τὴν δέησιν ποιούμενος, ἐπὶ τῇ κοινωνίᾳ ὑμῶν εἰς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἀπὸ τῆς πρώτης ἡμέρας ἄχρι τοῦ νῦν, πεποιθὼς αὐτὸ τοῦτο ὅτι ὁ ἐναρξάμενος ἐν ὑμῖν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἐπιτελέσει ἄχρι ἡμέρας Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ ćF
QSFUFYU
NBZ
JODMVEF
OPU
POMZ
o
CVU
BMTP
UIF
WFSTFT
o
XIFSF
1BVM
BHBJO
TBZT
that he is concerned about the recipients and longs to see them.170 The ὑπόθεσις has omitted the references to thanksgiving and prayer in the pre-text (εὐχαριστῶ, δέησις). The interest is thus concentrated on the function of the pre-text in relation to the recipients only: That Paul here praises their faith. All these things (ταῦτα πάντα) I counted as a loss for the sake of Christ Pre-text (Phil 3:7): Ἀλλὰ ἅτινα ἦν μοι κέρδη, ταῦτα ἥγημαι διὰ τὸν Χριστὸν ζημίαν This is the only quotation from the Pauline letters in the ὑποθέσεις. It may be significant that this single quotation refers to the abolishment of Jewish observances because of Christ, which is a recurrent theme in the ὑποθέσεις. Only the second half of 3:7 is quoted. Thus there is no mention of the gains (κέρδη) that Paul might have had in Judaism before his conversion.171 Another modification is the addition of πάντα, which intensifies the meaning of the pre-text. 168 The letter is assigned to Rome by the ‘Marcionite’ prologue (Souter 1913: 206) and Theodoret (ὑπόθεσις of Phil, PG 82: 560A) and in the Byzantine subscription (see the letter ending in the N. A. edition). Theophylact (ὑπόθεσις of Phil, PG 124: 1140A) dates the letter to Paul’s imprisonment after his first defense, thus again implying Rome as the place of writing. 169 It has been established that these phrases cannot serve as evidence for Rome as the place of authorship, see Lohmeyer

o
BOE

0O
UIF
EJČFSFOU
UIFPSJFT
SFHBSEJOH
UIF
PSJHJO
PG
UIJT
MFUUFS
TFF
Lohmeyer

o


XIP
BTTJHOT
UIF
MFUUFS
UP
$BFTBSFB
BOE
Müller

o


XIP
BSHVFT
GPS
&QIFTVT 170 Lohmeyer

o
EFTDSJCFT
o
BT
UIF
UIBOLTHJWJOH
der Dank
BOE
o
BT
B
QFSTPOBM
DPNmunication (Persönliches). The two passages are closely related. 1:7b takes up the theme of 1:5, κοινωνία, see Müller 2002: 45. 171 It is instructive to compare the ὑπόθεσις with a scholion attributed to Photius on the same passage: »Ἀλλ᾽ ἅτινά μοι ἦν κέρδη«. κέρδος λέγει τὰ ἀπὸ τοῦ νόμου αὐτῷ συλλεγέντα· ὥστε οὐ κακίζει τὸν νόμον, ὡς οἱ ἀπὸ Μαρκίωνος ληροῦσιν. εἰ δὲ καὶ ἥγηται αὐτὰ ζημίαν, οὐχ ἁπλῶς λέγει τοῦτο, ὅπερ ἦν ἂν κακίζοντος τὸν νόμον, ἀλλὰ ζημίαν αὐτὰ καλεῖ τῇ πρὸς Χριστὸν συγκρίσει καὶ παραθέσει, ὅπερ μᾶλλον εἰς ἐγκώμιον τοῦ νόμου τελεῖ, τὸ μὴ ἄλλως τολμᾶν ζημίαν αὐτὸν καλεῖν εἰ μὴ τῇ πρὸς Χριστὸν παραθέσει καὶ συγκρίσει (on Phil 3:7, text in K. Staab 1933: 627). ‘«But everything that was gain for me». «Gain» he calls what he has gathered for himself from the law. Thus he does not accuse the law, as Marcion’s followers foolishly BTTFSU
&WFO
JG
IF
DPVOUFE
JU
BT
B
MPTT
IF
EPFT
OPU
TBZ
UIJT
XJUIPVU
B
RVBMJĕDBUJPO
o
XIJDI
XPVME
CF
UIF
XPSET
PG
BO
BDDVTFS
PG
UIF
MBX
o
CVU
IF
DBMMT
UIFTF
UIJOHT
MPTT
XIFO
DPNQBSFE
BOE
XFJHIFE
BHBJOTU
$ISJTU
which rather amounts to praise of the law in that he does not dare to call it loss except when he compares

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

165

He praises the Philippians for their gift of fellowship DG
o  And having again exhorted (προτρεψάμενος) them in order to strengthen the morals (εἰς τὰ ἤθη), he thus ends the letter DG
o 

ćF
аɀшϦϣϯϧ϶
IBT
DIBOHFE
UIF
TFRVFODF
PG
o
BOE
o
ćF
FYIPSUBUJPO
JT
SFGFSSFE
to after the praise of the gift probably because of the notion that the Pauline letters should end with exhortation, an idea that seems also to be present in the ὑπόθεσις of 1 Cor (see above). The meta-term here is προτρέπω, which in the ὑποθέσεις is difficult to distinguish from the two related terms παραινέω and συμβουλεύω. The most stable element in the ὑποθέσεις that appears in connection with the hortatory passages is not a specific meta-term, but the phrase εἰς τὰ ἤθη.172 2.2.10. Hypothesis of Colossians He sends this letter from Rome, while he has not yet seen them (cf. 2:1), but heard about them.

As the other Imprisonment Letters (cf. 4:18), Col is assigned to Rome. This probably means that the ὑπόθεσις dates the letter to Paul’s imprisonment there.173 Some people wanted to deceive the Colossians with Greek sophisms (σοφίσματα ἑλληνικά) directed against the faith in Christ, concerning food permitted in the Law (2:16) and circumcision.

The term σόφισμα has some basis in the pre-text (πιθανολογία, 2:4; φιλοσοφία, 2:8), while the characterization of the sophisms as ‘Greek’ seems to go beyond the pre-text.174 and weighs it against Christ.’ This exposition of the passage highlights the words that the ὑπόθεσις has surpressed (ἅτινά μοι ἦν κέρδη) and the result is very different from that of the ὑπόθεσις. According to the scholion, Paul does not at all criticize the law here, he praises it. 172 Cf. the ὑπόθεσις of Col, καὶ τὰ ἄλλα τὰ πρὸς τὰ ἤθη συμβουλεύσας, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν, and the ὑπόθεσις of Heb, εἶτα πάλιν εἰς τὰ ἤθη προτρεψάμενος καὶ τούτους, καὶ ἀποδεξάμενος αὐτῶν τὴν διὰ τὸν Xριστὸν ὑπομονὴν, καὶ πείσας τιμᾶν τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους, τελειοῖ τὴν ἐπιστολήν. See Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004: o
"QQ
**
338o339). 173 So also the Byzantine subscription (see the letter ending in the N. A. edition). Theodoret (ὑπόθεσις of Col, PG 82: 592A) thinks the letter was written during Paul’s second imprisonment in Rome: Ἔγραψε δὲ ἀπὸ τῆς Ῥώμης, ἤδη τὸν πρῶτον διαφυγὼν κίνδυνον. ‘He wrote from Rome having already escaped the first danger.’ Also Theophylact (ὑπόθεσις of Col, PG 124: 1205A) says that the letter was written from prison in Rome and refers to the group of Imprisonment Letters as most precious in the collection: Πᾶσαι μὲν αἱ Ἐπιστολαὶ Παύλου ἅγιαι, μάλιστα δὲ αἱ δεδεμένου αὐτοῦ πεμπόμεναι. ‘All the letters of Paul are sacred, but especially those that were sent by him from prison’. The assigning of the letter to Rome does not have the same implication for Theodoret and Theophylact. Theodoret (ὑπόθεσις of Col, PG 82: 593A) bases his view on Acts and his detailed knowledge of the ancient geography. He assumes that Paul, while traveling to Phrygia must have brought the Gospel to the Phrygian cities Laodicea and Colossae. Theophylact (ὑπόθεσις of Col, PG 124: 1205B) does not reason along such lines but simply places the letter in the same group as the letters to the Romans and to the Hebrews, whom Paul had not met when he wrote to them. The ‘Marcionite’ prologue on the other hand, assigns the letter to Ephesus: Ergo apostolus iam ligatus scribit eis ab Epheso. ‘Therefore, the Apostle, now in chains, writes to them from Ephesus.’ (Text in Souter 1913: 206). The idea that Paul wrote from an imprisonment in Ephesus is rejected by Lohmeyer (1964: 14, n. 4): ‘Von einem Martyrium in Ephesus wissen wir nichts.’ 174 In this, the ὑπόθεσις differs from Theodoret (ὑπόθεσις of Col, PG 82: 593B) who describes the opponents of Paul in Colossae as Jewish Christians (τινὲς τῶν ἐξ Ἰουδαίων πεπιστευκότων). Theophylact brings a paraphrase of 2:20 (Commentary, PG 124: 1249CD), where he mentions a Greek element in the teaching of the heretics, namely the observation of days: Πῶς οὖν πάλιν νῦν, ὡς ἐν τῇ προτέρᾳ ζωῇ ζῶντες, ὑπόκεισθε τούτοις, διδάσκεσθε γὰρ ὅτι ἥδε ἡ ἡμέρα δεξιὰ, ἥδε ἀπαίσιος· ἅτινά ἐστιν Ἑλληνικὰ παρατηρήματα, ‘Why

166

Commentary

According to the ὑπόθεσις, circumcision was also a concern of the heretics. This is not stated explicitly in the pre-text but may be inferred from the reference to a circumcision not made with hands in 2:11.175 And first, as he gives thanks (εὐχαριστῶν) to God, he announces that they have been translated from darkness to the light of truth Pre-text ($PM
o 
add καὶ) εὐχαριστοῦντες (add ἅμα) τῷ πατρὶ τῷ ἱκανώσαντι ὑμᾶς εἰς τὴν μερίδα τοῦ κλήρου τῶν ἁγίων ἐν τῷ φωτί (13) ὃς ἐρρύσατο ἡμᾶς ἐκ τῆς ἐξουσίας τοῦ σκότους καὶ μετέστησεν εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἀγάπης αὐτοῦ This is the first instance in the ὑποθέσεις where the verb εὐχαριστῶ occurs. In the previous ὑποθέσεις this word has been avoided. But the verb in the ὑπόθεσις of Col probBCMZ
EPFT
OPU
SFĘFDU
UIF
ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰϭѼϪϣϫ

UIBU
PQFOT
UIF
UIBOLTHJWJOH
o
CVU
rather εὐχαριστοῦντες in 1:12. It is in any case clear that the paraphrase in the ὑπόθεσις reflects o
BOE
OPU
UIF
UIBOLTHJWJOH176 The matter is complicated further by a textual variant in the transmission of the pre-text: Papyrus 46 has καὶ εὐχαριστοῦντες ἅμα in 1:12, thus coordinating the participle εὐχαριστοῦντες with the preceding προσευχόμενοι καὶ αἰτούμενοι (1:9). This makes Paul and Timothy the subject of εὐχαριστοῦντες. On the other hand, without the addition of καί and ἅμα, the subject of the participle εὐχαριστοῦντες is apparently the Colossians themselves. Τhe text of the ὑπόθεσις, on the other hand, has Paul as the subject of εὐχαριστῶν. Does this mean that the ὑπόθεσις supports the reading of Papyrus 46? This question is difficult to answer as the ὑπόθεσις in any case has transformed the pre-text by changing the number from the plural to the singular. With this degree of freedom, it is difficult to make conjectures regarding the exemplar used by the ὑπόθεσις. The ὑπόθεσις has also conflated 1:12 and 1:13. In the pretext there is a shift between ὑμᾶς (v. 12) and ἡμᾶς (v. 13). This is ignored in the ὑπόθεσις, where the pronoun αὐτούς and elements from both verses (φῶς 1:12; σκότος, μεθιστάναι 1:13) appear. So that he should unite both (τὰ ἀμφότερα συνάψῃ) and give life to everything Pre-text (Col 1:20): καὶ δι’ αὐτοῦ ἀποκαταλλάξαι τὰ πάντα εἰς αὐτόν, εἰρηνοποιήσας διὰ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ σταυροῦ αὐτοῦ, δι’ αὐτοῦ εἴτε τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς εἴτε τὰ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς In the pre-text, ἀποκαταλλάξαι refers to the reconciliation of the universe (τὰ πάντα) with God (εἰς αὐτόν). The participle εἰρηνοποιήσας refers either to the making peace between God and the world, between conflicting entities within the world, or to both; do you again, as if you were living your former life, obey them [i.e. the στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου]? For you teach that this day is a lucky day, this day is unlucky, which are Greek observances.’ This Greek element he contrasts with the observances of food, which he describes as Jewish. The presence of Greek and Jewish elements is also referred to in the ὑπόθεσις. The ὑπόθεσις, however, does not say to which tradition the different observances belong: Εἶχον δὲ καὶ παρατηρήσεις πολλὰς Ἰουδαϊκὰς καὶ Ἑλληνικὰς, ἡμέρας παρατηρούμενοι, καὶ καιροὺς, καὶ βρώματα (ὑπόθεσις of Col, PG 124: 1205B). ‘They also practiced many Greek and Jewish observances, observing days and seasons and foods.’ 175 This is how 2:11 is understood by Theodoret (Commentary, PG 82: 609B): Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ὑπαχθέντες τὴν νομικὴν πολιτείαν ἠσπάσαντο, διδάσκει πάλιν τῆς περιτομῆς τὴν διαφοράν, ‘for, since they through deception embraced observance of the Law, he teaches them again on the different kinds of circumcision.’ 176 For the delimitation of the text see Lohmeyer




XIP
SFGFST
UP
o
BT
AEFS
%BOL
BOE
UP
o
as ‘die Bitte’, cf. H. Hübner 1997: 44.

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

167

considered one and the same process. As for the ὑπόθεσις, the first interpretation is excluded, since God could hardly be referred to as one of the ἀμφότερα. It should be noted that the language of the ὑπόθεσις here is reminiscent not of the pre-text, but of Eph: ὁ ποιήσας τὰ ἀμφότερα ἓν ... ἀποκαταλλάξῃ τοὺς ἀμφοτέρους ἐν ἑνὶ σώματι τῷ θεῷ (&QI
o 
ćF
аɀшϦϣϯϧ϶
PG
$PM
BOE
UIF
DBOPOJDBM
UFYU
PG
&QI
TQFBLT
PG
ACPUI
ϰп
ἀμφότερα/οἱ ἀμφότεροι respectively). In Eph, ‘both’ refers to the Jews and the Gentiles.177 The affinity in language between the ὑπόθεσις of Col and the text of Eph does not, however, explain the meaning of τὰ ἀμφότερα in the ὑπόθεσις of Col. It is unlikely that the ὑπόθεσις here refers to the unification of Jews and Gentiles in Christ, as the ὑποθέσεις elsewhere stress the abolishment of Judaism (cf. especially the ὑπόθεσις of Rom). 2.2.11. Hypothesis of 1 Thessalonians He sends this letter from Athens (3:1), after he has seen them and spent time with them o  Pre-text (1 Thess 3:1): διὸ μηκέτι στέγοντες εὐδοκήσαμεν καταλειφθῆναι ἐν Ἀθήναις μόνοι Many ancient sources assign the letter to Athens. This may have some basis in the pretext, where Paul mentions that he wanted to be left there.178 The ὑπόθεσις, taking this as a reference to the place of composition, also makes Timothy the letter carrier, probably basing this on καὶ ἐπέμψαμεν Τιμόθεον (3:2).179 The interpretation of the ὑπόθεσις presupposes that ἐπέμψαμεν in 3:2 is an epistolary aorist referring to the event from the perspective of the recipients of the letter. Another reason may be seen in Paul’s description 177 See H. Hübner

o 178 Theodoret (Preface, PG 
$
RVPUFT
o
UP
QSPWF
UIBU
1BVM
XSPUF
UIF
MFUUFS
GSPN
"UIFOT
͑Ϯьϰϥϫ
γὰρ δὴ γεγράφθαι νομίζω τῶν πρὸς Θεσσαλονικέας τὴν προτέραν· ταύτην γὰρ ἐξ Ἀθηνῶν ἀπέστειλεν ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος, ὡς πρὸς αὐτοὺς γράφων ἐδίδαξεν. Ἐν γὰρ τῷ μέσῳ τῆς ἐπιστολῆς οὕτω φησί· »Διὸ μὴ στέγοντες εὐδοκήσαμεν καταλειφθῆναι ἐν Ἀθήναις μόνοι« ‘I consider he wrote the first letter to the Thessalonians as the first one. For this the divine Apostle sent from Athens, as he teaches us in the writing. For in the middle of the letter he says: “Therefore, when we could no longer forbear, we thought it good to be left at Athens alone”. The letter is assigned to Athens also in the Byzantine subscription, see the letter ending in the N. A. edition. So also the subscription in the Peshitta and the ‘Marcionite’ prologue (text in Souter 1913: 206). T. Holtz (1986: 123) points out that 3:1 is the source of this idea: ‘Aus der Nennung des Ortsnamens Athen hat ein gewichtiger Teil der Überlieferung des Briefes geschlossen, er sei dort verfasst worden. Das ergibt sich aus ihr nicht.’ 179 The information that Timothy was the letter carrier is also found in the subscription to the letter in the Peshitta: ‘End of the first Epistle to the Thessalonians; which was written from Athens, and was sent by the hands of Timothy’ (Transl. Murdock 1893). It seems to be rare in the Greek tradition. According to the N. A. edition, a reference to Timothy as the letter carrier is found in a correction to min. 1739 and in a few other witnesses. Clarke (1857: VI, 556) refers to a subscription in a Coptic version: ‘Written from Athens, and sent by Silvanus and Timothy.’ On this he remarks: ‘That it was not sent by either Silvanus or Timothy is evident enough from the inscription [scil. prescript], for St. Paul associates these two with himself, in directing it to the Thessalonian church.’ A variant of this subscription is quoted by Horner in the introduction to his edition of the Bohairic New Testament: ‘Finished and completed was the epistle of Thessalonica the first. It was written in Athens, and sent with Silvanus and Timotheus, with help from God most high’, followed with a prayer and a concluding doxology, see G. W. Horner 1905: xxvii. In the edited text with translation (p. 457), he prints a shorter version with only Silvanus as the letter carrier: ‘To Thessalonike 1, it was written in Athennas: it was sent by Silouanous. Stichoi 312, Chapters 4.’ In the textual apparatus on this page (p. 457), Horner refers to ‘Euth.’, by which he probably means the Euthalian ὑπόθεσις.

168

Commentary

of Timothy in 3:2, which is quite similar to the description of the letter carrier Tychicus in Eph and Col (&QI
o
$PM
o 
#VU
UIF
EFTDSJQUJPO
JO
o
EPFT
OPU
SFGFS
UP
the composition and dispatch of the letter. It is explicitly stated that Paul sent Timothy UP
MFBSO
BCPVU
UIF
DPOEJUJPO
PG
UIF
ćFTTBMPOJBOT
BOE
UP
TUSFOHUIFO
UIFN
o 
"U
UIF
time he wrote 1 Thess, Timothy had already returned to him (3:6). The Apostle had suffered much affliction in Beroea, Philippi of Macedonia, and in Corinth, and knowing how much he suffered in Thessalonice, he fears that the Thessalonians, when they hear about his sufferings in the cities mentioned above, will be tempted by the tempter and take offence. Pre-text (
ćFTT
o 
Ϩϟх
ϡпϮ
Юϰϣ
ɀϮч϶
аϪѩ϶
ПϪϣϫ
ɀϮϭϣϩтϡϭϪϣϫ
аϪѴϫ
Юϰϧ
ϪтϩϩϭϪϣϫ
θλίβεσθαι, καθὼς καὶ ἐγένετο καὶ οἴδατε. διὰ τοῦτο κἀγὼ μηκέτι στέγων ἔπεμψα εἰς τὸ γνῶναι τὴν πίστιν ὑμῶν, μή πως ἐπείρασεν ὑμᾶς ὁ πειράζων καὶ εἰς κενὸν γένηται ὁ κόπος ἡμῶν Only one of the cities, Philippi, is mentioned in the pre-text (2:2). The story of the sufferings of Paul in the other cities is found in the text of Acts.180 One may therefore assume that the list of cities is directly or indirectly derived from Acts. There seems however, in UIF
аɀшϦϣϯϧ϶
UP
CF
OP
JOUFSFTU
JO
UIF
JUJOFSBSZ
PG
1BVM
BOE
UIF
MJTU
PG
DJUJFT
o
BMUIPVHI
TFFNJOHMZ
EFSJWFE
GSPN
"DUT
o
DBOOPU
FBTJMZ
CF
TRVBSFE
XJUI
UIF
JUJOFSBSZ
PG
UIBU
CPPL
(1) The cities are not mentioned in the order of the Acts. According to Acts, Paul had already been in Philippi when he came to Thessalonice, but the ὑπόθεσις says that the Thessalonians only later will hear about his suffering there. (2) If we with the ὑπόθεσις presuppose that the letter was written from Athens, Paul’s sufferings in Corinth had according to Acts not yet taken place, since he reached Corinth only after his stay in Athens ("DUT
o
o 
ćFTF
EJďDVMUJFT
JOEJDBUF
UIBU
UIF
&VUIBMJBO
аɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
do not represent the most accurate biblical scholarship of antiquity, and one gets the impression that scraps of information have been put together without any real interest in historical questions.181 2.2.12. Hypothesis of 2 Thessalonians This he sends from Rome The sending of the letter from Rome has no basis in the pre-text.182 Some idle and unruly (ἀργοὶ καὶ ἄτακτοι) impostors from Thessalonice were seducing them, saying that the coming was already imminent.

180
1IJMJQQJ
o
ćFTTBMPOJDF
o
#FSPFB
o
$PSJOUI
o 181 With regard to this, Theodoret (Preface, PG

o
SFQSFTFOUT
B
NPSF
TPQIJTUJDBUFE
BQQSPBDI
XIFSF
every letter is dated within the chronology of Acts. This attempt to harmonize the biblical writings is not found in the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις and κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, but only in the Euthalian Prologue to the Letters of Paul. 182 The Byzantine subscription says that the letter was written from Athens, but the subscription in a number of Greek medieval manuscripts assign the letter to Rome; see the letter ending in the N. A. edition. The prologue to the letter that was made to supplement the ‘Marcionite’ set (text in Souter 1913: 207) agrees with the Byzantine subscription.

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

169

Pre-text (2 Thess 3:11): ἀκούομεν γάρ τινας περιπατοῦντας ἐν ὑμῖν ἀτάκτως, μηδὲν ἐργαζομένους ἀλλὰ περιεργαζομένους Pre-text (2 Thess 2:2): […] ὡς ὅτι ἐνέστηκεν ἡ ἡμέρα τοῦ κυρίου The description of the deceivers is a remarkable conflation of passages from the pre-text. A description of the idle from the paraenetic part of the letter is used to describe Paul’s opponents. Ἀτάκτως is transformed into ἄτακτοι, and μηδὲν ἐργαζόμενοι into ἀργοί. The application of these words to the deceivers explains why the ὑπόθεσις says that the deceivers came from Thessalonice. This reflects the words ἐν ὑμῖν in the pre-text (3:11). The reason for the identification of the idle with the opponents can be found in the description of the idle as περιεργαζόμενοι (3:11). This term may be used with reference to people who in their idleness become ‘busybodies’ and speak of things of which they should not (e.g. 1 Tim 5:13). Thus, the ὑπόθεσις has apparently linked the religious speculation in Thessalonice with idleness.183 And in general, he ordered (παρήγγειλεν) that he who did not obey his words should be expelled from the community (ἀποσυνάγωγον γίνεσθαι). Pre-text (
ćFTT
o 
ϰϭѴ϶
Ϣс
ϰϭϧϭъϰϭϧ϶
ɀϟϮϟϡϡтϩϩϭϪϣϫ
Ϩϟх
ɀϟϮϟϨϟϩϭѼϪϣϫ
Гϫ
ϨϱϮцѾ
Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ ἵνα μετὰ ἡσυχίας ἐργαζόμενοι τὸν ἑαυτῶν ἄρτον ἐσθίωσιν […] (14) εἰ δέ τις οὐχ ὑπακούει τῷ λόγῳ ἡμῶν διὰ τῆς ἐπιστολῆς, τοῦτον σημειοῦσθε, μὴ συναναμίγνυσθαι αὐτῷ, ἵνα ἐντραπῇ· (15) καὶ μὴ ὡς ἐχθρὸν ἡγεῖσθε, ἀλλὰ νουθετεῖτε ὡς ἀδελφόν The meta-communicative verb παραγγέλλω seems to be derived from the pre-text, although it there introduces another command. The ὑπόθεσις has omitted the second verb παρακαλοῦμεν and this omission makes the ὑπόθεσις somewhat sharper than the pretext.184 The most important deviation lies however in the paraphrase: The ὑπόθεσις reproduces μὴ συναναμίγνυσθαι αὐτῷ with the stronger expression τοῦτον ἀποσυνάγωγον γίνεσθαι, thus interpreting the words in the pre-text as a precept about excommunication. This is why both the purpose clause ἵνα ἐντραπῇ ‘that he should feel ashamed’ (3:14) and the exhortation to comfort the disobedient (3:15) are omitted from the ὑπόθεσις. And now, having prayed (ἐπευξάμενος) for peace on their behalf, he ends the letter Pre-text (2 Thess 3:16): αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ κύριος τῆς εἰρήνης δῴη ὑμῖν τὴν εἰρήνην διὰ παντὸς ἐν παντὶ τρόπῳ. ὁ κύριος μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν. The ὑπόθεσις uses the meta-communicative verb ἐπεύχομαι to describe 3:16. The classification of the pre-text as an act of prayer is reasonable inasmuch as the first clause has the 183 This interpretation seems to be suggested by Theodoret (Commentary, PG 82: 672C) when writing on 2 Thess 3:11, he says: Ἴδιον γὰρ τῶν ἀργίᾳ συζώντων ἀδολεσχία, καὶ φλυαρία, καὶ ἡ ἀνόνητος πολυπραγμοσυνή, ‘for frivolity, silly talk and useless curiosity belong to those who live together in idleness.’ Trilling (1980: 151) discusses the link between the idleness and the eschatological speculation in Thessalonice and finds this interpretation false: ‘Das alles weist in die eingeschlagene Richtung einer »Alltagsmoral« und ergibt kein Anzeichen für religiöse Motivation oder für typisch »schwärmerische« Phänomene.’ 184 Theophylact (Commentary, PG 124: 1353D) notes the effect on the reader when the two verbs are used together: Εἰπὼν »παραγγέλλομεν« προσηνέστερον πάλιν ποιεῖ τὸν λόγον, καί φησι· »παρακαλοῦμεν«. Φοβερωτέρα οὖν ἡ παράκλησις, καὶ ἀξιοπιστοτέρα. ‘Having said “we order”, again he makes his speech more gentle, and says “we exhort”. Thus, his exhortation becomes more frightful and carry more weight.’ One may say that the ὑπόθεσις goes even further than this by omitting παρακαλοῦμεν.

170

Commentary

verb in the optative with God as subject.185 It is worth noting that this text is the only text that is directly classified as a prayer in the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters, although there are many texts that could have received this designation, as is the case in the κεφάλαιατίτλοι (εὐχή). 2.2.13. Hypothesis of Hebrews He sends this from Italy Pre-text (Heb 13:24b): ἀσπάζονται ὑμᾶς οἱ ἀπὸ τῆς Ἰταλίας The interpretation of the ὑπόθεσις of 13:24 is found in many ancient commentaries, but is not the only possible interpretation. The phrase οι απο Ιταλιας may refer to their original home and not necessarily their present one.186 He writes also to all Hebrew believers of the circumcision this letter as a demonstrative (ἀποδεικτική) letter about the coming of Christ and the abolishment of the shadow of the Law.

The genre-designation ἀποδεικτική ἐπιστολή is in the ὑποθέσεις used only of Heb. It is related to the meta-communicative verb ἀποδείκνυμι which occurs frequently in the ὑπόθεσις: And first, he shows (ἀποδείκνυσι) that the prophets were sent to proclaim the Savior o

And he shows that Christ himself is the Son of God, through whom everything came into being o

And he shows that the Law has not made anyone perfect, but contained a shadow of the good things to come
o

Again, he shows that the office of the High Priest was translated from Aaron to Christ o

4JODF
UIF
BSHVNFOU
GSPN
4DSJQUVSF
JT
DFOUSBM
JO
UIFTF
QBTTBHFT
DG
o
oo


one may assume that scriptural argument is what the genre-designation here refers to. The fathers (πατέρες) were justified by faith (πίστει), he announces, not by the deeds of the Law (οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου) Pre-text (Heb 11:2): ἐν ταύτῃ [i.e. πίστει] γὰρ ἐμαρτυρήθησαν οἱ πρεσβύτεροι 185 Theophylact (Commentary, PG

%o"
BMTP
SFGFST
UP
2 Thess 3:16 as ‘prayer’: Πανταχοῦ μετὰ τὰς παραινέσεις τὰς εὐχὰς τίθησιν, ὥσπερ τινὰς σφραγῖδας καὶ σήμαντρα τῶν ἀποτεθησαυρισμένων ἐπιτιθεὶς τὰς εὐχάς. ‘Everywhere he places the prayers after the exhortations, as if putting his prayers as seals and marks on goods in the store-house.’ 186 This is pointed out by Michel (1966: 545): ‘Entweder befindet sich der Verfasser bei den grüssenden Leuten aus Italien und schreibt selbst aus Italien, oder aber die grüssenden Leute stammen aus Italien und halten sich ihreseits im Ausland beim Verfasser auf.’ Both views are attested in the subscriptions to the letter. The majority of manuscripts have ἀπὸ τῆς Ἰταλίας, but minuscule 1911 has ἀπὸ Ἀθηνῶν. Theodoret (Preface, PG 82: 44A) assigns the letter to Rome, quoting 13:24b as evidence. According to Theophylact (ὑπόθεσις of Heb, PG 125: 188BC), the letter is sent from Italy, but it is earlier than 2 Tim since Paul’s death is here not imminent. He thinks it was written during Paul’s first imprisonment in Rome: Ἐν ταύτῃ δὲ ἐπαγγέλλεται τοῖς Ἑβραίοις, ὅτι ὄψεται αὐτούς. [...] Εἶτα εἰς τὰς Σπανίας ἐλθὼν, ἐκεῖθεν ἴσως εἶδε καὶ τοὺς Ἑβραίους, εἶτα εἰς Ῥώμην ἦλθεν αὖθις, ὅτε καὶ ὑπὸ Νέρωνος ἀνῃρέθη. ‘But in this letter, he promises the Hebrews that he will see them […]. Then, having traveled to Spain, thereupon he perhaps saw also the Hebrews. Then he came to Rome again at the time he was killed by Nero.’

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

171

The treatment in the ὑπόθεσις of Heb 11 is a remarkable transformation of the pre-text. According to Michel, Heb 11 is in itself a ‘summary’ composed after Jewish models.187 The ὑπόθεσις has replaced πρεσβύτεροι with πατέρες (cf. 1:1). More important is the replacement of μαρτυρεῖσθαι with δικαιοῦσθαι. This interpretation has some basis in the pre-text, cf. the description of Abel and Noah: Abel ἐμαρτυρήθη εἶναι δίκαιος (11:4), and Noah became an ‘heir’ (κληρονόμος) ‘according to the faith of righteousness’ (κατὰ πίστιν δικαιοσύνης). But the idea of justification is not central in the majority of the examples in Heb 11, the idea being absent even from the story of Abraham (11:17). The antithesis πίστει/οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου is not found in the pre-text, and appears to be derived from other letters in the Pauline collection (cf. Rom 3:28; &QI
o
BOE
QMBDFE
IFSF
CZ
UIF
ὑπόθεσις. 2.2.14. Hypothesis 1 Timothy He sends this from Laodicea. Laodicea is not mentioned in the pre-text and seems to contradict it.188 About the ordaining of bishops, presbyters (πρεσβύτεροι) and deacons, and about the behavior and qualities required of those who are appointed.

The ὑπόθεσις is here summarizing o
*U
TIPVME
CF
OPUFE
UIBU
UIF
аɀшϦϣϯϧ϶
BEET
the order of the πρεσβύτεροι. It seems clear from the list that the πρεσβύτεροι form a separate group, distinct from the ἐπίσκοποι and the διάκονοι. The term πρεσβύτερος is VTFE
JO

CVU
OPU
JO
UIF
QBTTBHF
PO
PSEBJOJOH
o 
ćF
MJTU
JO
UIF
аɀшϦϣϯϧ϶
TFFN
thus to be anachronistic, reflecting the later distinction between the ἐπίσκοπος and the πρεσβύτερος.189 About the younger men (τοὺς νεωτέρους), that they should curb their passions, rather marry, and not live shamefully. Pre-text (1 Tim 5:14): βούλομαι οὖν νεωτέρας γαμεῖν, τεκνογονεῖν, οἰκοδεσποτεῖν, μηδεμίαν ἀφορμὴν διδόναι τῷ ἀντικειμένῳ λοιδορίας χάριν In the pre-text, there is a distinction between the older and the younger widows (νεωτέρας). The younger widows are ordered to remarry (5:14). In the ὑπόθεσις, this command has oddly been transformed into a command to the younger men (τοὺς 187 Michel (1966: 368) thinks however that the author of Heb found this ‘summary’ as a Christian composition: ‘Kap. 11 selbst ist ein „Summarium“ nach dem Muster spätjudischen Paradigmenreihen, ist aber wohl auch in seiner Vorlage schon christlich gewesen.’ Weiss

o


PO
UIF
PUIFS
IBOE
UFOET
to assume that the Vorlage was a Jewish text that the author of Heb through his editing made ‘readable’ for Christians. 188 According to 1:3, Paul has left Timothy in Ephesus and has moved on to Macedonia. From there he writes 1 Tim, see Dibelius/Conzelmann

o
BOE
J. Roloff (1988: 62). The Byzantine subscription is the following: Πρὸς Τιμόθεον α´ ἐγράφη ἀπὸ Λαοδικείας ἥτις ἐστὶν μετρόπολις Φρυγίας τῆς Πακατιανῆς (see the letter ending in the N. A. edition). ‘The first letter of Timothy was written from Laodicea, which is the capital of Phrygia Pacatiana.’ A similar subscription is found in Theodoret (Commentary, PG 82: 829C): ἡ πρὸς Τιμόθεον α´ Ἐπιστολὴ ἐγράφη ἀπὸ Λαοδικείας ἥτις ἐστὶν μετρόπολις Φρυγίας. ‘The first letter to Timothy was written from Laodicea, which is the capital of Phrygia.’ 189 The meaning of the term πρεσβύτερος is 1 Tim is debated. It may refer to (1) the elders in the congregation; (2) the ἐπίσκοποι and the διάκονοι; or (3) the older men in the congregation, see I. H. Marshall 1999: 610, with references.

172

Commentary

νεωτέρους). If the verse is read without its context, it would be possible to take νεωτέρας as an object of γαμεῖν, and thus to understand the verse as a command to the men, that they should marry younger women, beget children (τεκνογονεῖν), and rule the household (οἰκοδεσποτεῖν). But the context makes this interpretation difficult to defend. Either the ὑπόθεσις is based on a different pre-text that is unknown to us, or the ὑπόθεσις presents a misinterpretation of 5:14. The reason for this may be found in the pre-text: The verb οἰκοδεσποτεῖν could easily be associated with the male οἰκοδεσπότης. 2.2.15. Hypothesis of 2 Timothy Once again from Rome, he sends this letter. Pre-text (2 Tim 1:17): ἀλλὰ γενόμενος ἐν Ῥώμῃ σπουδαίως ἐζήτησέν με καὶ εὗρεν The letter is dated to the imprisonment of Paul in Rome on the basis of 1:17 and the description of Paul’s imminent martyrdom. The ὑπόθεσις does not make any distinction between Paul’s first and second imprisonment in Rome.190 2.2.16. Hypothesis of Titus He sends this letter from Nicopolis, since he spent the winter there. Pre-text (Tit 3:12): Ὅταν πέμψω Ἀρτεμᾶν πρὸς σὲ ἢ Τυχικόν, σπούδασον ἐλθεῖν πρός με εἰς Νικόπολιν, ἐκεῖ γὰρ κέκρικα παραχειμάσαι That the letter was sent from Nicopolis is derived from the pre-text. This is however a misinterpretation, since the pre-text implies that Paul has not yet arrived there (ἐκεῖ).191 And first, giving thanks to God (εὐχαριστῶν τῷ θεῷ) for his devotion, he announces (σημαίνει) that faith in Christ is not something new, but was prepared and promised by God before the world began. Pre-text (5JU
o
͑ϟѼϩϭ϶
ϢϭѼϩϭ϶
ϦϣϭѼ
Ћɀшϯϰϭϩϭ϶
Ϣс
ΚϥϯϭѼ
͗ϮϧϯϰϭѼ
Ϩϟϰп
ɀцϯϰϧϫ
ἐκλεκτῶν θεοῦ καὶ ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας τῆς κατ’ εὐσέβειαν ἐπ’ ἐλπίδι ζωῆς αἰωνίου, ἣν ἐπηγγείλατο ὁ ἀψευδὴς θεὸς πρὸ χρόνων αἰωνίων ἐφανέρωσεν δὲ καιροῖς ἰδίοις, τὸν 190 The Byzantine subscription (see the letter ending in the N. A. edition) explicitly dates the letter to Paul’s second imprisonment there: Πρὸς Τιμόθεον β´ τῆς Ἐφεσίων ἐκκλησίας ἐπίσκοπον πρῶτον χειροτονηθέντα ἐγράφη ἀπὸ Ῥώμης ὅτε ἐκ δευτέρου παρέστη Παῦλος τῷ καίσαρι Ῥώμης Νέρωνι. ‘The Second Letter to Timothy, who had been elected the first bishop of the Church of the Ephesians, was written from Rome when Paul stood before Nero, the emperor of Rome, for the second time.’ So also Theodoret (Preface, PG 82: 44A): Ἐσχάτην δὲ πασῶν τὴν δευτέραν πρὸς Τιμόθεον γέγραφε· καὶ τοῦτο δὲ πάλιν ἐκ τῶν αὐτοῦ γραμμάτων καταμαθεῖν ῥᾴδιον. ‘As the last of all, he wrote the second letter to Timothy. And, again, one may easily learn this from the letter itself.’ 191 See Dibelius/Conzelmann 1972: 153 and Marshall 1999: 342. This misunderstanding is however widespread. The Byzantine subscription (see the letter ending in the N. A. edition) refers to Nicopolis in Macedonia: Παύλου ἀποστόλου πρὸς Τίτον τῆς Κρητῶν ἐκκλησίας πρῶτον ἐπίσκοπον χειροτονηθέντα ἐγράφη ἀπὸ Νικοπόλεως τῆς Μακεδονίας. ‘The Letter of Paul the Apostle to Titus, who had been elected the first bishop of the church of the Cretans, was written from Nicopolis in Macedonia.’ Theodoret (Commentary, PG 82: 869B) though describes Nicopolis as a Thracian city: Τῆς Θρᾴκης ἐστὶν ἡ Νικόπολις, τῇ δὲ Μακεδονίᾳ πελάζει. Δῆλον τοίνυν ὡς κατ᾽ ἐκεῖνον τὸν καιρὸν, καθ᾽ ὃν ἐν τῇ Μακεδονίᾳ καὶ Ἀχαΐᾳ διέτριβεν, ἔγραψε τὴν ἐπιστολήν. ‘Nicopolis is in Thracia, close to Macedonia. Thus, it is clear that Paul wrote the letter at the time when he was staying in Macedonia and Achaia.’ Cf. Theophylact (Commentary, PG 125: 169B): Ἡ δὲ Νικόπολις τῆς Θρᾴκης ἐστὶ, τῷ Ἴστρῳ ἐπικειμένη. ‘Nicopolis lies in Thracia, on the Ister.’

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

173

λόγον αὐτοῦ ἐν κηρύγματι ὃ ἐπιστεύθην ἐγὼ κατ’ ἐπιταγὴν τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν θεοῦ, Τίτῳ γνησίῳ τέκνῳ κατὰ κοινὴν πίστιν· χάρις καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς καὶ Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν. The ὑπόθεσις uses the participle εὐχαριστῶν together with the finite verb σημαινει in its paraphrase of the letter opening (o 
*U
JT
QV[[MJOH
UIBU
UIF
аɀшϦϣϯϧ϶
IFSF
VTFT
UIF
phrase εὐχαριστῶν τῷ θεῷ since there is no thanksgiving in the pre-text. In the ὑπόθεσις, the following prepositional phrase διὰ τὴν αὐτοῦ εὐλάβειαν represents the reason for the thanksgiving. This phrase seems to be derived from the description of Titus as γνησίῳ τέκνῳ κατὰ κοινὴν πίστιν. The meta-communicative verb εὐχαριστία has probably been introduced into the ὑπόθεσις because thanksgivings regularly are placed at the beginning of the other Pauline letters. It should be noted that this kind of interference is unexpected, as the ὑποθέσεις as a rule do not represent the Pauline thanksgiving periods with εὐχαριστέω/εὐχαριστία. The ὑπόθεσις does use it here, where the term is not found in the pre-text.192 2.2.17. Hypothesis of Philemon He sends this letter from Rome.

Rome is not mentioned in the pre-text, but the ὑπόθεσις assigns the letter to Rome together with the other imprisonment letters.193 Onesimus, the slave of Philemon, had escaped, and he went to the Apostle, was instructed by him and became useful to him for service.

The depiction of Onesimus as the runaway slave of Philemon is found in many ancient and modern commentaries on the letter.194 Recent scholars have argued that this is not

192 One may compare the use of εὐχαριστία for the final benediction in 2 Cor (see above). 193 Cf. the ‘Marcionite’ prologue (text in Souter 1913: 206): Scribit autem ei a Roma de carcere. ‘He writes to him from prison in Rome.’ The Byzantine subscription (see the letter ending in the N. A. edition) also shows Rome: Ἐγράφη ἀπὸ Ῥώμης διὰ Ὀνησίμου οἰκέτου. ‘It was written from Rome [and sent] by the slave Onesimus.’ The Euthalian ὑπόθεσις does not contain any discussion of the canonical status of this letter. Interestingly, such a discussion is found in Theophylact (ὑπόθεσις, PG

$o"


XIP
strongly defends it: Φασὶ δέ τινες μὴ χρῆναι ταύτην συναριθμεῖσθαι ταῖς λοιπαῖς, ἅτε ὑπὲρ εὐτελοῦς οὖσαν πράγματος· ἀλλ᾽ ὅρα πόσα ἐκ ταύτης τὰ χρήσιμα. Πρῶτον μὲν παιδεύει ἡμᾶς καὶ ὑπὲρ τῶν δοκοῦντων εὐτελῶν σπουδάζειν. »Μὴ καταφρονήσατε γὰρ«, φησὶν ὁ Κύριος, »ἑνὸς τῶν μικρῶν«. Δεύτερον δὲ, ὅτι εἰ δοῦλος οὕτως ἰταμὸς καὶ κακοῦργος ὑπέστρεψεν, οὐ χρὴ ἀπογινώσκειν ἑαυτῶν, καὶ μάλιστα ἐν ἐλευθερίᾳ ἀνατραφέντων. Τρίτον, ὅτι οὐ χρὴ προφάσει εὐλαβείας δούλους ἀποσπᾶν τῶν δεσποτῶν μὴ βουλομένων. Τέταρτον, ὅτι οὐ χρὴ ἡμᾶς ὑπερφρονεῖν τῶν δούλων ἐναρέτων ὄντων, οὐδὲ ἐπαισχύνεσθαι αὐτοὺς, ὁπότε Παῦλος καλεῖ τέκνον τὸν Ὀνήσιμον. ‘Some say that this should not be counted among the other letters since it is about a slight matter. But see how many the benefits of this letter are! First, he teaches us to be FBHFS
BMTP
JO
NBUUFST
XIJDI
BQQFBS
TMJHIU
A'PS
EP
OPU
EFTQJTF
o
TBZT
UIF
-PSE
o
POF
PG
UIF
MJUUMF
POFT
/FYU
if a slave so bold and crafty was converted, we should not feel despair about ourselves, who indeed were raised in freedom. Third, that we should not use religion as a pretext to separate slaves from their masters, if the masters do not want it. Fourth, we should not despise virtuous slaves, nor should we be ashamed of them, since Paul calls Onesimus his child.’ 194 According to Theodoret (ὑπόθεσις, PG 82: 872A), Onesimus had ‘stolen something and run away’ (ὑφελόμενός τι καὶ ἀποδράς), and Theophylact (ὑπόθεσις, PG 125: 172B) even refers to money: καὶ γὰρ κλέψας χρήματα ἐκ τῆς οἰκίας τοῦ Φιλήμονος, ἀπέδρα. ‘For he stole money from the house of Philemon and ran away.’

174

Commentary

explicitly stated in the text of the letter, and have offered various explanations, while even Onesimus’ status as a slave has been doubted.195 2.2.18. The Hypotheses of the Pauline Letters: Summary The meta-terminology Thanksgiving. The ὑποθέσεις tend to avoid the verb εὐχαριστέω and the corresponding noun εὐχαριστία. One would expect that these would appear in the paraphrases of the Pauline thanksgivings, but this is not the case. The thanksgivings are generally treated from another perspective: The center of interest is their function in relation to the recipients of the letter. Instead of an expected εὐχαριστεῖ, we find ἀποδέχεται, μαρτυρεῖ or other meta-communicative verbs that refer to the various functions of the thanksgivings. Thus, the perspective of the ὑποθέσεις is in general that of rhetorical analysis, with little interest in the liturgical elements of the Pauline letters. The terms εὐχαριστία and εὐχαριστέω however do appear, but the motivation for using them is not found in the thanksgiving formula of the pre-texts (εὐχαριστῶ/εὐχαριστοῦμεν τῷ θεῷ) but elsewhere. εὐχαριστία is once used with reference to the final benediction (ὑπόθεσις of 2 Cor). In the ὑπόθεσις of Col, the verb is used with reference not to the thanksgiving, but to the passage that immediately follows it ($PM
o 
Prayer. The treatment of prayer in the Pauline letters is similar. Generally speaking, the ὑποθέσεις do not include Paul’s prayers. The verb προσεύχομαι and the corresponding noun προσευχή (εὐχή) appear in the ὑπόθεσις 1 Cor, 1 Thess, and 1 Tim. In these ὑποθέσεις they are not used as text-deictica with reference to the pre-text, but are used on another level, namely, paraphrasing statements about prayer in the pre-texts.196 Τhe verb ἐπεύχομαι appears once as a text-deicticon with reference to the final benediction of a letter (2 Thess). Paraenesis. The treatment of the Pauline paraenesis in the ὑποθέσεις has been examined in a previous study.197 In this previous study, it was demonstrated that the ὑποθέσεις use a flexible terminology for moral exhortation: The nominal form παραινετικοὶ λόγοι (ὑποθέσεις of Rom,1 Cor, Eph) alternates with the verbs παραινέω (ὑποθέσεις of 1 Cor, Gal, Col, 1 Thess, 2 Thess, 2 Tim, Tit), and προτρέπω (ὑποθέσεις of 2 Cor, Phil, 1 Thess, Heb, 1 Tim, 2 Tim). A frequent element in the ὑποθέσεις used to describe moral exhor195 E. Reinmuth (2006: 18) thinks that Onesimus was a fugitive slave who was on his way to the sanctuary of "SUFNJT
BU
&QIFTVT
1
.àMMFS

o


PO
UIF
PUIFS
IBOE
BTTVNFT
UIBU
UIF
TMBWF
0OFTJNVT
DBNF
to Paul not as a fugitivus but to ask him to act as a mediator in some conflict. According to M. Wolter 
o


Hübner

o


J. A. Fitzmyer


BOE
o


0OFTJNVT
XBT
B
TMBWF
CVU
not a fugitive slave, cf. the material from the papyri collected in P. Arzt-Grabner

o
UP
support the thesis that the slave Onesimus was a ‘wanderer’ (erro). A. D. Callahan

o
HPFT
further and argues that he was not a slave but a brother of Philemon. The status of Onesimus as a runaway slave is presupposed also in the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. On this problem see, Hellholm/Blomkvist 
o
"QQ
**
334o335), with references. 196 Ὑπόθεσις of 1 Cor: ‘About marriage, he teaches that the union is not to be broken, and that abstinence should be for a short time only, for the sake of prayer (διὰ τὴν εὐχήν). Ὑπόθεσις of 1 Thess: ‘He exhorts them to improve morally and to always rejoice in hope, to pray (προσεύχεσθαι) and give thanks to the Lord.’ Ὑπόθεσις of 1 Tim: ‘He then draws up church rules about prayer (περὶ προσευχῆς); how, where and for whom one should pray (προσεύχεσθαι).’ 197 Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004 (App. II).

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

175

tation is the prepositional phrase εἰς τὰ ἤθη (ὑποθέσεις of Rom, 1 Cor, Gal, Phil, Heb, 2 Tim) . It should also be noted that the meta-communicative verb παρακαλῶ, which in the pre-texts regularly introduces the exhortation, tends to be avoided. The paraphrase of the pre-text The present commentary has confirmed the observation of Willard that the ὑποθέσεις represent a less thorough paraphrase than the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. It may be said that not only are they less thorough, but they also contain errors. Some of these errors are found elsewhere in the tradition as well,198 while others are more difficult to explain.199 This feature must be kept in mind in any attempt to reconstruct the text form of the biblical writings that was used by the author of the ὑποθέσεις. The use of the ὑποθέσεις for this purpose is problematic. The ‘Paulusbild’ The ὑποθέσεις include the historical circumstances of each letter and thus one would expect references to Acts. There are, however, no such references. Acts are for the most part neglected. The ‘Paulusbild’ of the ὑποθέσεις is almost exclusively based on the Pauline letters regarding the circumstances (or occasion) of each letter. The subscriptions of the letters may also have been the source for some information. According to the ὑποθέσεις, all the imprisonment letters were sent from Rome, but this is said of other letters also (e.g. 2 Thess). From the ὑπόθεσις of 1 Thess one gets the impression that the text of Acts was known, but no attempt is made to place the letters of Paul within the relative chronology of that book: The ὑπόθεσις of Eph is impossible to synchronize with Acts, as Paul is said to write to the Ephesians from Rome before he has seen them. With regard to this, the ὑποθέσεις differ from the works of Theodoret and Theophylact, where the texts of Acts is used. Since the ὑποθέσεις are based almost exclusively on the letters, it comes as no surprise that Paul here has the status of apostle. There is here an interesting combination of dependence and transformation of the pre-text, since the ὑποθέσεις refer to Paul not only as an apostle but as ‘the Apostle’ (ὁ ἀπόστολος). This use of the title is obviously dependent on the letter openings, but the presence of the definite article transforms him into ‘the Apostle’, κατ᾽ ἐξοχήν. According to the ὑποθέσεις, the letters of Paul the Apostle has one important emphasis: That the Law was abandoned through the coming of Christ.200 This was recognized by Dahl as the main concern of the ὑποθέσεις.201 Thus, the opponents of Paul are for the most part in the ὑποθέσεις ‘Jews’ or ‘Judaizers’. This tendency has certainly a basis in the pre-texts, but the ὑποθέσεις have developed this idea further. The present commentary has pointed out that the ὑποθέσεις go beyond Paul in saying that not even the Jews need circumcision after the coming of Christ. Moreover, the ὑποθέσεις 198 Such as the assignment of Titus to Nicopolis based on the mentioning of this city in the letter or the idea that Timothy carried the letter of Paul to the Thessalonians. 199 Such as the admonition to the young men (not to the young widows, as in the pre-text) in the ὑπόθεσις of 1 Tim. 200 This is also indicated by the reference in the ὑπόθεσις of Hebrews where ‘the office of the high priest was translated from Aaron to Christ, whose type was Melchisedec, who was not of the tribe of Levi. The fathers were justified by faith, he announces, not by the deeds of the Law.’ 201 See Dahl 2000d: 264.

176

Commentary

omit positive statements in Paul about the Jewish elements and the part of the Jews in the history of salvation (see especially the ὑπόθεσις of Rom). The focus on the abolishment of Jewish practices is a feature that the ὑποθέσεις share with the ‘Marcionite’ prologues to the letters of Paul. The idea that Paul sometimes is fighting a two-front battle (Theodoret), against the Jews and against the Gnostics, is not found in the ὑποθέσεις at all. The abolishment of the Jewish practices is treated as an inevitable turning point of history marked by the coming of Christ. The ὑποθέσεις seem to be less interested in the individual, since they transform statements about the individual as being ‘in Christ’ with general statement about salvation history (see the Commentary above on 2 Cor 5:17 and Gal 5:6, where the ὑποθέσεις replaces the phrase ἐν Χριστῷ with a clause referring to the coming of Christ.). This tendency confirms Dahl’s observation that the Euthalian apparatus in general does not focus on mystical theology. The existence of the individual believer in Christ is a theme that is included in the ὑποθέσεις only in the context of paraenesis. In the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters, Paul is on one rare occasion depicted as preaching to the Jews through his letters (see the paraphrase of 3PN
o


CVU
GPS
UIF
NPTU
part, he is concerned with the condition of the Christian churches, ‘reminding’, ‘correcting’, ‘teaching’, and ‘instructing’ them (so the Διὰ τί). On the basis of the Anti-Judaic polemics, Dahl assumed that the ὑποθέσεις must have originated at a time when the Jewish observances were still debated within the church. For this reason he suggested that the ὑποθέσεις originated at quite an early period. Dahl further noted that the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις share this feature with the ‘Marcionite’ prologues to the Pauline letters. It is however uncertain whether the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις can be dated on the basis of this feature. The genre is also open for other interpretations. The ὑπόθεσις is by definition a secondary genre and the ὑποθέσεις aim to reproduce the contents of their pre-texts. The polemical elements in the ὑποθέσεις may be viewed simply as attempts to capture and reproduce something important in the pre-texts, regardless of the state of affairs at the time the ὑποθέσεις were composed.

2.3. The Hypotheses of the Catholic Letters 2.3.1. Authorship Like the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters, the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters appear in a number of ancient works. They are found in Euthalius, the commentary of Oecumenius (PG
o


BOE
JO
UIF
QTFVEP"UIBOBTJBO Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae (PG

o 438). In addition to these works, they are also found in the commentary of Theophylact (PG 
o

o 
ćF
аɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
PG
UIF
$BUIPMJD
MFUUFST
UIVT
IBWF
B
XJEF
dissemination, and it is difficult at the present stage of research to say whether they were originally composed for any of the works mentioned above. 2.3.2. Structure The ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters have a similar structure to that of the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters:202 202 See the remarks in Ehrhard 1891: 391 and above on the structure on the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters.

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

177

1. An introductory notice [2. The prophasis of the letter] 3. A summary of its contents, beginning with και πρωτον μεν in all ὑποθέσεις except James. 4. A notice on the letter ending, usually in the form και ουτως τελειοι την επιστολην. Only 2 John and Jude have a prophasis section. By contrast, the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters with the exception of Romans all have this section. This difference probably reflects the character of the pre-texts. The Pauline letters more often contain information on the communicative situation than the Catholic letters do. The text of the introductory notices in the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters is transmitted in a variety of forms. von Dobschütz demonstrated that the history of the text could be explained on the basis of the pseudo-Athanasian Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae. von Dobschütz found three different recensions, and described the history of the text as follows:203 (1) The most primitive form is represented by the Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae, where it is stated that the Catholic letters are named after their respective authors. Opening of the ὑπόθεσις of James from the Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae. (PG 28: 405D)

My translation

Ἐπιστολαὶ καθολικαὶ ἑπτά The Seven Catholic Letters. τούτων ἐστὶν πρώτη Ἰακώβου. Of these the first is [the letter] of James. ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν τῶν γραψάντων καὶ αὗται These are alsoa named after the authors themselves; προσαγορεύονται· because James himself writes this […] αὐτὸς γὰρ Ἰάκωβος ταύτην γράφει […] a The idea may be that the Catholic letters like the Gospels are named after their authors, since the Catholic letters in the Synopsis do not follow after the Pauline letters but immediately after Acts.

The causal clause that contains the explanation of the name may be introduced by ἐπειδή instead of γάρ, e.g. the opening of the ὑπόθεσις of 1 John, referred to as the fourth letter in the collection: Τετάρτη, Ἰωάννου. Οὕτως καὶ αὕτη καλεῖται, ἐπειδὴ καὶ αὐτὸς Ἰωάννης ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς καὶ ταύτην ἐπιστέλλει. There is also a similar formula in the Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae prefixed to the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters: οὕτω καλοῦνται ἐπειδὴ αὐτὸς Παῦλος … ‘They are thus called because Paul himself …’204 (2) The next stage in the development in the text is the omission of the clause οὕτω καλεῖται (or its equivalent). This occurs in a branch of the tradition.205 The result is that the ὑποθέσεις begin abruptly with ἐπειδὴ: ‘Because (ἐπειδὴ) James himself writes this…’ In this text form, the reader is not told that the causal clause is intended as an explanation of the title. von Dobschütz found this form in the majority of manuscripts.206 This is also the preferred text of von 203 See von Dobschütz 1893: 70. 204 See von Dobschütz 1893: 70. This formula corresponds to the Διὰ τί that is found in Euthalian manuscripts. On the Διὰ τί, see Willard

o
o
BOE
BCPWF 205 This variant is found e.g. in Zacagni’s most important witness, Codex Regio-Alexandrinus ( = 181), which Zacagni at this point did not follow. 206 This is the text that von Soden preferred in his edition of the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters. It is also used as a basis for the present translation.

178

Commentary

Soden in his edition of the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters. (3) The third stage is a correction of the second: The word ἐπειδὴ is now omitted and the ὑπόθεσις begins with ταύτην γράφει (or ἐπιστέλλει). Thus, the second form of the text is evidence of the antiquity of the first, which was unknown to Zacagni.207 2.3.3. Hypothesis of James Because James himself (αὐτὸς Ἰάκωβος) writes this to those of the scattered twelve tribes (τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν δώδεκα φυλῶν διασπαρεῖσι) who believed in our Lord Jesus Christ. Pre-text (Jas 1:1): Ἰάκωβος θεοῦ καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοῦλος ταῖς δώδεκα φυλαῖς ταῖς ἐν τῇ διασπορᾷ χαίρειν The explanation of the name of the letter is based on the letter opening. The name of the author is not discussed at all and the ὑπόθεσις has also omitted the description of him as θεοῦ καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοῦλος. By contrast, the description of the recipients has been transformed. In the pre-text, the twelve tribes probably represents the Christians as the true Israel, and the reference to the dispersion should also be taken in a symbolic sense, referring to the dispersion of the Christians in the world.208 The ὑπόθεσις has taken the reference to the twelve tribes literally, and makes James write to Jewish Christians. And he writes it as a didactic letter (διδασκαλικὴ ἐπιστολή) teaching about different temptations what kind of temptation comes from God, and what kind comes from the heart of men.

The genre-designation ‘didactic letter’ associates Jas with Rom and 1 Pet. According to UIF
аɀшϦϣϯϧ϶
+BNFT
UFBDIFT
BCPVU
EJČFSFOU
LJOET
PG
UFNQUBUJPO
GSPN
(PE
o
GSPN
NBO


This is apparently contradicted by the pre-text: Μηδεὶς πειραζόμενος λεγέτω ὅτι ἀπὸ θεοῦ πειράζομαι· ὁ γὰρ θεὸς ἀπείραστός ἐστι κακῶν, πειράζει δὲ αὐτὸς οὐδένα. ἕκαστος δὲ πειράζεται ὑπὸ τῆς ἰδίας ἐπιθυμίας (oB 
ćF
JOUFSQSFUBUJPO
PG
UIF
аɀшϦϣϯϧ϶
NBZ
however be based on the following: (1) There is a certain ambiguity in the pre-text in the use of the term πειρασμός. It is used in a positive sense in 1:2 where ποικίλοι πειρασμοί are said to produce endurance (ὑπομονή). Also 1:12 represents a positive statement: μακάριος ἀνὴρ ὃς ὑπομένει πειρασμόν. Commentators have argued that there seems to be a shift in the meaning of the word πειρασμος between 1:2 and 1:13.209 Thus, the statement of the ὑπόθεσις does have some basis in the pre-text, even if the pre-text does not say explicitly that the πειρασμός comes from God. (2) But even this idea may find some support in the pre-text. Possibly, the πειρασμὸς ἀπὸ θεοῦ in the ὑπόθεσις refers to the 207 See von Dobschütz 1893: 70. Zacagni (1698: 486, n. i = PG 85: 675, n. 39) did however conjecture that such a text form once existed: Causa hujus diversitatis inde orta fuisse videtur, quod fortasse aliquam interrogationem tituli loco huic argumento Euthalius præfixerit, puta διὰ τί Ἰακώβου ἐπιστολὴ καθολικὴ λέγεται, vel quid simile; quam interrogationem, veluti supervacaneam nulla in ipso argumento mutatione facta, librarii rejecerint […]. ‘The diversity seems to have been created as follows: Perhaps Euthalius had prefixed to this Hypothesis a question in the place of a title, for instance ‘Why is it called the Catholic LetUFS
PG
+BNFT
PS
TPNFUIJOH
MJLF
JU
BOE
UIJT
RVFTUJPO
XBT
PNJUUFE
CZ
UIF
TDSJCFT
o
BT
JG
JU
XFSF
SFEVOEBOU
o
XJUIPVU
UIFJS
NBLJOH
BOZ
DIBOHF
JO
UIF
UFYU
PG
UIF
)ZQPUIFTJT
JUTFMG
ćF
QSPOPVO
ϰϧ
JT
PNJUUFE
JO
UIF
Migne edition. 208 This is the interpretation of Dibelius (Dibelius/Greeven

o 
ABO
EBT
XBISF
*TSBFM
EFN
EFS
Himmel die Heimat, die Erde aber nur Fremde d. h. Diaspora ist, also an die Christenheit auf Erden.’ So also W. Popkes (2001: 72) and C. Burchard (2000: 6). 209 Popkes (2001: 103): ‘Man kann argumentieren, Jak spiele mit der Mehrschichtigkeit des Terminus.’

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

179

testing of Abraham. This story is used in +BT
o
BOE
UIF
MBOHVBHF
VTFE
JO
UIF
(FOesis account (ὁ θεὸς ἐπείραζεν τὸν Ἀβραάμ, Gen 22:1) may have influenced the language of the ὑπόθεσις.210 About the rich he orders (παραγγέλλει) that they should not be preferred in the churches (ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις) to the poor. Pre-text (+BT
o 
ͳϢϣϩϲϭц
Ϫϭϱ
Ϫу
Гϫ
ɀϮϭϯϵɀϭϩϥϪϴцϟϧ϶
Зϳϣϰϣ
ϰуϫ
ɀцϯϰϧϫ
ϰϭѼ
κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τῆς δόξης; ἐὰν γὰρ εἰσέλθῃ εἰς συναγωγὴν ὑμῶν ἀνὴρ χρυσοδακτύλιος […] ćF
QBTTBHF
PO
UIF
SJDI
o
JT
SFGFSSFE
UP
CZ
NFBOT
PG
UIF
NFUBDPNNVOJDBUJWF
WFSC
παραγγέλλω, which reflects the imperative μὴ ἔχετε in 2:1.211 The ὑπόθεσις introduces the verb προκρίνω ‘prefer before’ which corresponds to ἐν προσωπολημψίαις ἔχειν in the pre-text. The change should be considered a stylistic revision. Notably, the words προσωπολημπτέω and προσωπολημψία are both avoided in the ὑποθέσεις. Another change is the replacement of συναγωγή with ἐκκλησία. The pre-text uses both words for the Christian community (συναγωγή 2:2; ἐκκλησία in 5:14). And that one should show faith not only in word, but also in deed, and that the doers of the Law are justified, not the hearers. Pre text (Jas 2:18b): δεῖξόν μοι τὴν πίστιν σου χωρὶς τῶν ἔργων, κἀγώ σοι δείξω ἐκ τῶν ἔργων μου τὴν πίστιν Pre-text (Jas 1:22): γίνεσθε δὲ ποιηταὶ λόγου καὶ μὴ ἀκροαταὶ μόνον παραλογιζόμενοι ἑαυτούς The expression ‘to show faith’ seems derived from the pre-text (2:18b), where the idea that there is a close connection between faith and works is already present. In the pre-text, the imperative is used polemically against an imaginative opponent. The ὑπόθεσις, on the other hand, does not reproduce this aspect of the pre-text but concentrates on the moral exhortation: The ὑπόθεσις thus interprets the letter as paraenetic, the concern of James is, according to the ὑπόθεσις, not to combat a theological opponent, but to exhort his readers. Moreover, the ὑπόθεσις has apparently replaced the ‘doers of the word’ with the ‘doers of the Law’, if not, the variant reading ποιηται νομου already existed in the pre-text of the ὑπόθεσις.212 2.3.4. Hypothesis of 1 Peter Because Peter himself writes this as a didactic letter to Jews in the Diaspora who have become Christians. He strengthens them, since they are believers of Jewish origin. 210 As the ὑπόθεσις, Theophylact (Commentary, PG 125: 1136B, on Jas 1) speaks of two different kinds of temptation: Φαμὲν οὖν, ὅτι διττοί εἰσιν οἱ πειρασμοὶ, οἱ μὲν τὴν ἀρχὴν ἀφ᾽ ἡμῶν ἔχοντες, οἱ δὲ ἀπὸ Θεοῦ γυμνασίας χάριν καὶ ἀναῤῥήσεως ἡμῖν ἐπαγόμενοι. ‘Therefore, we answer that there are two kinds of temptation, the ones that have their cause in ourselves, and the ones from God that are brought upon us for the sake of exercise and manifestation.’ 211 The use of παραγγέλλει as a meta-communicative verb representing an imperative is found also in the paraphrase of προσκαλεσάσθω τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους (5:14). The ὑπόθεσις paraphrases this as παραγγέλλει προσκαλεῖσθαι τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους. 212 On this variant, see Dibelius/Greeven 1964: 146 and Popkes 2001: 112 and 130.

180

Commentary

Pre-text (1 Pet 1:1): Πέτρος ἀπόστολος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐκλεκτοῖς παρεπιδήμοις διασπορᾶς Πόντου, Γαλατίας, Καππαδοκίας, Ἀσίας, καὶ Βιθυνίας In the pre-text, the ‘exiles of the Diaspora’ is used metaphorically of the recipients as exiles in the world. With regard to this, the letter opening of 1 Pet resembles that of Jas.213 In the ὑπόθεσις, the words are taken literally and understood as a reference to Jewish Christians of the Diaspora.214 The ὑπόθεσις even considers their Jewish origin the reason for strengthening them with the letter. It should also be noted that the ὑπόθεσις has omitted the title ἀπόστολος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. The intention can hardly be that the ὑπόθεσις denies Peter this title, but the omission may be related to the fact that Paul in the ὑποθέσεις throughout is described as ὁ ἀπόστολος. The ὑποθέσεις of the letters do not use this title for others. He announces that the message of salvation and resurrection (τὸ κήρυγμα τῆς σωτηρίας καὶ ἀναστάσεως) from the Lord has reached even the nether world (ᾅδης), so that also they who have died before will rise and be judged (κριθῶσι) with their bodies (ἐν τῷ σώματι), and they will last (διαμείνωσι) through the grace of resurrection (τῇ χάριτι τῆς ἀναστάσεως). Pre-text (1 Pet 4:6): εἰς τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ νεκροῖς εὐηγγελίσθη ἵνα κριθῶσι μὲν κατὰ ἀνθρώπους σαρκὶ ζῶσι δὲ κατὰ θεὸν πνεύματι Pre-text (1 Pet 3:19): ἐν ᾧ καὶ τοῖς ἐν φυλακῇ πνεύμασιν πορευθεὶς ἐκήρυξεν The ὑπόθεσις here apparently presents a conflation of 4:6 and 3:19. 4:6 is one of the most difficult passages in the pre-text. The meaning of νεκροῖς εὐηγγελίσθη is not clear. It may refer to a preaching in the realm of the dead.215 There are also other possibilities: The word νεκροῖς may be taken as a metaphor referring to the ‘spiritually dead’, Christian dead who heard the proclamation of the Gospel during their lifetime.216 In addition, it is uncertain what is meant by the expressions κριθῆναι κατὰ ἀνθρώπους σαρκί and ζῇν κατὰ θεὸν πνεύματι. It is unlikely that κριθῶσι refers to the final judgment,217 and 213 So R. Feldmeier (2005: 33): ‘Gerichtet ist der Brief an Christen »in der Zerstreuung«. Der Begriff διασπορα geht auf die LXX zurück und umschreibt dort die Exilsituation des unter die Fremdvölker zerstreuten Gottesvolkes.’ Cf. also N. Brox

o
BOE
Achtemeier

o 
214 That the addressees were Jewish Christians was the opinion also of Eusebius (H. E. iii, 4): καὶ ἐκ τῶν Πέτρου δὲ λέξεων ἐν ὁπόσαις καὶ οὗτος ἐπαρχίαις τοὺς ἐκ περιτομῆς τὸν Χριστὸν εὐαγγελιζόμενος τὸν τῆς καινῆς διαθήκης παρεδίδου λόγον, σαφὲς ἂν εἴη ἀφ᾽ ἧς εἰρήκαμεν ὁμολογουμένης αὐτοῦ ἐπιστολῆς, ἐν ᾗ τοῖς ἐξ Ἑβραίων οὖσιν ἐν διασπορᾷ Πόντου καὶ Γαλατίας Καππαδοκίας τε καὶ Ἀσίας καὶ Βιθυνίας γράφει. ‘Similarly, from Peter’s language we can gather the names of the provinces in which he preached the Gospel of Christ to the circumcised, proclaiming the message of the New Covenant. It is clearly stated in the epistle which, as I said, is accepted as his, in which he writes to the Hebrews of the Dispersion in Pontus and Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia.’ (Transl. G. A. Williamson/A. Louth). According to Brox (1979: 25), this view was generally held by the Greek fathers. It is found also in some Western commentators, e.g. Bengel

o  215 For this interpretation, see Brox

o
BOE
Feldmeier 2005: 144. 216 These possibilities are discussed by Acthemeier

o  217 Especially because a description of God’s judgment as ‘in the flesh’ (σαρκί) and somehow ‘after human standards’ (if this is actually what κατὰ ἀνθρώπους means) would be unacceptable, see Achtemeier 1996: 288. A common interpretation is that this judgment has already taken place, and that it refers to the judgment of the antediluvian world. See Clarke (1857: VI, 864) and Feldmeier (2005: 144). Theophylact (Commentary, PG 125: 1240C) takes both κριθῶσι and ζῶσι as verbs referring to past events and, according to him, the judgment was effected when Christ visited the dead in Hades. Thus he solves the problem

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

181

ζῶσι does not necessarily refer to the life of the believers after the resurrection.218 Also 3:19, with its reference to the proclamation of Christ to the ‘spirits in prison’, is a difficult verse. The ὑπόθεσις presents a solution to these exegetical problems. According to the ὑπόθεσις, the message (κήρυγμα) has reached Hades or the nether world. The κήγρυμα of the ὑπόθεσις corresponds to ἐκήρυξε in 3:19. Some Greek minuscules (614 pc) as well as the Peshitta read ‘in Hades’ (ἐν τῷ ᾅδῃ) for ἐν φυλακῇ. This is close to the language of the ὑπόθεσις, but it is uncertain whether the author of the ὑπόθεσις read ἐν τῷ ᾅδῃ in 3:19. One may however assume that the ὑπόθεσις understands 3:19 and 4:6 as references to the same event, and that this event is the proclaiming to the dead in Hades.219 The ὑπόθεσις has also a definite idea of the content of the proclamation as being the message of salvation and resurrection (τὸ κήρυγμα τῆς σωτηρίας καὶ ἀναστάσεως), which is not stated in the pre-text. The judgment (cf. κριθῶσι both in the pre-text and the ὑπόθεσις) is understood in the ὑπόθεσις as a reference to God’s final judgment. The various transformations of the text in the ὑπόθεσις may be understood against this background: (1) The antithesis of the pre-text between judgment κατὰ ἀνθρώπους σαρκί on the one hand, and life κατὰ θεὸν πνεύματι on the other, is abandoned. Since the ὑπόθεσις understands the judgment as God’s final judgment, the words κατὰ ἀνθρώπους σαρκί represented a difficulty and were omitted. (2) The νεκροί of the pre-text is replaced with προπαθόντες. This word has a more narrow meaning, one which excludes the metaphorical sense (‘spiritually dead’), which is possible with νεκροί. (3) The σαρκί of the pre-text is replaced with ἐν σώματι. (4) The ὑπόθεσις adds ἀναστῶσι before κριθῶσι, so that the phrase ἐν σώματι refers to the resurrected bodies of the dead before judgment. (5) The ὑπόθεσις changes the ζῶσι ‘live’ of the pre-text to διαμείνωσι ‘last, remain’. (6) As a replacement of κατὰ θεὸν πνεύματι, the ὑπόθεσις adds τῇ δὲ χάριτι τῆς ἀναστάσεως. Thus the various changes represent a coherent interpretation of the text. The ὑπόθεσις interprets the antithesis κριθῶσι μὲν κατὰ ἀνθρώπους σαρκί / ζῶσι δὲ κατὰ θεὸν πνεύματι as a chronological sequence. And that the end of all things has now drawn close, and everybody must be ready to account to the Judge. Pre-text (1 Pet 4:7): πάντων δὲ τὸ τέλος ἤγγικεν. σωφρονήσατε οὖν καὶ νήψατε εἰς προσευχάς Pre-text (1 Pet 4:5): οἳ ἀποδώσουσιν λόγον τῷ ἑτοίμως ἔχοντι κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς The ὑπόθεσις presents a conflation of 4:7 and 4:5. 4:7a is reproduced with minor changes. The second half of the verse (4:7b) is not rendered in the ὑπόθεσις. Instead, the ὑπόθεσις offers a transformation of 4:5. According to the pre-text, men will account ‘to Ηim who with the phrase σαρκι mentioned in the context of judgment: Τοῦ κυρίου τοῖς ἐν ᾅδη φοιτήσαντος, οἱ μὲν ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ σαρκικῶς ζήσαντες κατεκρίθησαν. ‘When the Lord went to those in Hades, they who had lived their life in the world according to the flesh, were condemned.’ 218 See Brox (1979: 199), who does not limit its meaning to the post-resurrection period: ‘Für Menschen ist das Gericht entsprechend, für Gott die pneumatische Existenz, in die er Menschen überführt.’ Similarly Bengel (1742: 1021): Vivere dicuntur, non vivificari, quia vivificatio illorum iam facta est cum Christo. ‘They are said to live, not to be made alive, since they have already been made alive with Christ.’ 219 In 3:19 it is said explicitly that Christ made the proclaiming, while this is not the case in 4:6. This is one of the difficulties with the identification of the two events (ἐκήρυξε in 3:19 and εὐηγγελίσθη in 4:6), see Achtemeier

o
ćF
аɀшϦϣϯϧ϶
EPFT
OPU
TBZ
FYQMJDJUMZ
UIBU
$ISJTU
QSPDMBJNFE
UP
UIF
EFBE
CVU
speaks instead of the message reaching Hades.

182

Commentary

stands ready (ἑτοίμως) to judge the living and the dead’ (4:5). The ὑπόθεσις changes ἑτοίμως to ἕτοιμοι and uses similar words to express another idea: ‘that everybody must be ready (ἕτοιμοι) to account to the Judge’. The transformation of 4:5 in the ὑπόθεσις may have a basis in exhortations in 4:7b. In the pre-text, these exhortations appear as a consequence (cf. οὖν) of the coming end. Thus, to follow these exhortations may be considered an act of preparation for judgment. It is still difficult to explain why the ὑπόθεσις uses phrases from 4:5 to express this. There is a possibility that the author of the ὑπόθεσις has misunderstood the language in 4:5. 2.3.5. Hypothesis of 2 Peter The letter is a reminder of primary subjects (ὑπόμνησις τῶν πρώτων). Pre-text (
1FU
o
Ϣϧч
Ϫϣϩϩфϯϵ
Ћϣх
аϪѩ϶
аɀϭϪϧϪϫѭϯϨϣϧϫ
ɀϣϮх
ϰϭъϰϵϫ
ϨϟцɀϣϮ
ϣСϢшϰϟ϶
καὶ ἐστηριγμένους ἐν τῇ παρούσῃ ἀληθείᾳ. δίκαιον δὲ ἡγοῦμαι, ἐφ’ ὅσον εἰμὶ ἐν τούτῳ τῷ σκηνώματι, διεγείρειν ὑμᾶς ἐν ὑπομνήσει Pre-text (
1FU
o
ϰϟъϰϥϫ
НϢϥ
Ћϡϟɀϥϰϭц
ϢϣϱϰтϮϟϫ
аϪѴϫ
ϡϮрϲϵ
Гɀϧϯϰϭϩфϫ
Гϫ
ϟШ϶
διεγείρω ὑμῶν ἐν ὑπομνήσει τὴν εἰλικρινῆ διάνοιαν, μνησθῆναι τῶν προειρημένων ῥημάτων ὑπὸ τῶν ἁγίων προφητῶν καὶ τῆς τῶν ἀποστόλων ὑμῶν ἐντολῆς τοῦ κυρίου καὶ σωτῆρος The designation of the letter as a reminder of primary subjects has a basis in 1:12 and o
XIFSF
UIF
QISBTF
ϢϧϣϡϣцϮϵ
ϣϧϫ
Гϫ
аɀϭϪϫфϯϣϧ
PDDVST
DG
BMTP
ϪϫфϪϥϫ
ɀϭϧϣѴϯϦϟϧ
1:15). The meaning of the pre-text has been modified: 1:12 is a general statement of what UIF
BVUIPS
BMXBZT
Ћϣц
XJMM
EP
BOE
o
JT
OPU
B
EFTDSJQUJPO
PG

1FU
POMZ
CVU
SFGFS
UP
both letters (ἐν αἷς). The ὑποθέσεις, on the other hand, considers only 2 Peter ὑπόμνησις, while it describes 1 Peter as ἐπιστολὴ διδασκαλική.220 The designation of 2 Peter as ὑπόμνησις corresponds to the genre-designation ἐπιστολὴ ὑπομνηστική in the epistolographic handbook of Pseudo-Libanius.221 And he commands (ἐντέλλεται) everybody to be ready for it [i.e. the day of the Lord] with good works, and to love (ἀγαπᾶν) the writings of the Apostle, not paying heed to those who slander (τοῖς διαβάλλουσιν) them, because they slander all divine scripture as well. Pre-text (
1FU
o 
Ϣϧш
Ћϡϟɀϥϰϭц
ϰϟѼϰϟ
ɀϮϭϯϢϭϨҀϫϰϣ϶
ϯɀϭϱϢрϯϟϰϣ
Џϯɀϧϩϭϧ
Ϩϟх
ἀμώμητοι αὐτῷ εὑρεθῆναι ἐν εἰρήνῃ, καὶ τὴν τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν μακροθυμίαν σωτηρίαν ἡγεῖσθε, καθὼς καὶ ὁ ἀγαπητὸς ἡμῶν ἀδελφὸς Παῦλος κατὰ τὴν δοθεῖσαν αὐτῷ σοφίαν ἔγραψεν ὑμῖν, ὡς καὶ ἐν πάσαις ταῖς ἐπιστολαῖς λαλῶν ἐν αὐταῖς περὶ τούτων, ἐν αἷς ἐστιν δυσνόητά τινα, ἃ οἱ ἀμαθεῖς καὶ ἀστήρικτοι στρεβλοῦσιν ὡς καὶ τὰς λοιπὰς γραφὰς πρὸς τὴν ἰδίαν αὐτῶν ἀπώλειαν. The ὑπόθεσις says that Peter commands (ἐντέλλεται) them to be ready for the day of the Lord (cf. 3:12) with good works and to love the writings of the Apostle. The metacommunicative verb ἐντέλλομαι reflects the imperatives in the pre-text (σπουδάσατε, 220 Cf. the distinction between those who Paul had seen and those he had not seen in the Διὰ τί. Paul reminds and corrects the first group, while he instructs and teaches the second. 221 Pseudo-Libanius (De forma epistolari 42, cf. 89): ὑπομνηστικὴ δι᾽ ἧς δοκοῦμέν τινα τοῦ ζητουμένου πράγματος ἡμῖν ὑπομιμνήσκειν τὸν σκοπὸν ἡμῶν ἐν αὐτῇ χαράττοντες. ‘The suggestive style is that in which we seem to make a suggestion to someone in response to an inquiry directed to us, while (actually) stamping it with our own aim.’

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

183

ἡγεῖσθε). The ὑπόθεσις agrees with the pre-text regarding the command to readiness. There are however three deviations: (1) The ὑπόθεσις omits the exhortation to regard the patience of the Lord as salvation. (2) The ὑπόθεσις adds the exhortation ‘to love the writings of the Apostle’. This is not said explicitly in the pre-text, but does reflect its language: In the pre-text, Paul is referred to as ὁ ἀγαπητὸς ἡμῶν ἀδελφός, and the command to love (ἀγαπάω) his writings in the ὑπόθεσις seems to be a transformation of this. (3) According to the pre-text, there are some things in the letters of Paul that are difficult to understand. These difficult things (cf. the relative pronoun ἅ) are twisted (στρεβλόω) by the ignorant,222 who treat the other scriptures likewise. In the ὑπόθεσις, this is changed: Now it is the writings of the Apostle in general that are slandered (διαβάλλω), and this applies to all divine scripture as well. This statement in the ὑπόθεσις may be understood in different ways: (1) The slandering of Paul’s letters implies a rejection of them as Scripture. If this is the meaning, then the opponents also reject ‘all divine scripture’, and this makes this interpretation difficult to defend.223 (2) The word διαβάλλουσιν is used figuratively. The slandering of the writings may be taken as a figure of speech implying that any misinterpretation or misuse of Paul’s letters gives these letters a bad reputation, and thus indirectly is act of slandering. This is most probably the idea expressed by the ὑπόθεσις. 2.3.6. Hypothesis of 1 John Because John himself, the author of the gospel, sends this, reminding those who were already believers in the Lord (cf. 2:7; 3:11).

The ὑπόθεσις identifies the author of the letter with the evangelist, according to tradition, John the Son of Zebedee.224 One should note that the ὑπόθεσις does not use the title αποστολος.225 The avoidance of the title for the author is a feature that the ὑποθέσεις of the Johannine letters share with those of 1 and 2 Pet. The sending of the letter is characterized by the meta-communicative verb ὑπομιμνῄσκω. Within the summary, διδάσκω and παραινέω occur in general statements about the letter.226 Thus, the distinction between didactic and reminding letters is not clear. The epistolographic handbook of PseudoLibanius includes the mixed type, a type of letter that represents different genres.227 222 Theophylact (Commentary, PG 125: 1288A) gives the following explanation: »Δυσνόητα« δὲ λέγει, ἃ καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν ἀσεβῶν φησιν ἐνδιαστρόφως ἐξαγγέλεσθαι. Τοῦτο γὰρ τὸ »στρεβλοῦσθαι« σημαίνει. “Hard to be understood”, he says, which also, he asserts, are interpreted in a distorted fashion by the godless. For this is the meaning of the word “wrest”. Cf. Bengel (1742: 1042): ‘στρεβλοῦσιν) distorquent’. 223 In his commentary on the pre-text, Paulsen

o
QPJOUT
PVU
UIBU
UIF
PQQPOFOUT
SFGFSSFE
UP
are invariably Christians: ‘Es gibt Menschen (offenkundig ChristInnen), die sich dieser Texte in einer unzulässigen Weise bedienen.’ It is hard to believe that the ὑπόθεσις refers to non-Christians or more specifically, to Jews. The Jews could obviously not be described as people who rejected ‘all divine scripture.’ 224 Cf. The letter is attributed to the apostle John already in the Muratorian Fragment (Text in Souter 1913: 209). On the significance of this early testimony, see Strecker 1989: 12 and Klauck 1991: 18. One may say that this attribution was adopted by all ancient commentators who treated this letter as part of their canon. 225 Cf. the various forms of the superscriptions where these occur:, e.g., Ἐπιστολὴ καθολικὴ τοῦ ἁγίου ἀποστόλου Ἰωάννου, see the letter opening in the N. A. edition. 226 εἶτα λοιπὸν δι᾽ ὅλης τῆς ἐπιστολῆς περὶ ἀγάπης διδάσκει […] παραινεῖ δὲ δι᾽ ὅλης τῆς ἐπιστολῆς μὴ ἀθυμεῖν τοὺς πιστεύοντας τῷ κυρίῳ. 227 Pseudo-Libanius (De forma epistolari 45): μικτὴ δὲ ἣν ἐκ διαφόρων χαρακτήρων συνιστῶμεν, cf. 92.

184

Commentary

He explains that the mystery that [has come] to us is not something new (μὴ νεώτερον εἶναι τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς μυστήριον), but that He was from the beginning and will always be. Pre-text (1 Joh 1:1) Ὃ ἦν ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς, ὃ ἀκηκόαμεν, ὃ ἑωράκαμεν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς ἡμῶν, ὃ ἐθεασάμεθα καὶ αἱ χεῖρες ἡμῶν ἐψηλάφησαν, περὶ τοῦ λόγου τῆς ζωῆς The ὑπόθεσις introduces the word μυστήριον, which is not found in the pre-text. The entire phrase μὴ νεώτερον εἶναι τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς μυστήριον is found also in the ὑποθέσεις of Eph and 2 John. The phrase may be considered a paraphrase of &QI
o
DG
ϪϱϯϰфϮϧϭϫ
in Eph 1:9), and its use in the context of 1 John is unexpected. Possibly, the ὑπόθεσις has supplied the word μυστήριον as the antecedent of the neuter relative pronoun in 1:1, thus postulating the following text: τὸ μυστήριον ὃ ἦν ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς. And he demonstrates (δεικνύει) the unity of the Son with his Father, and that he who denies the Son does not have the Father. Pre-text (1 Joh 2:23) πᾶς ὁ ἀρνούμενος τὸν υἱὸν οὐδὲ τὸν πατέρα ἔχει· ὁ ὁμολογῶν τὸν υἱὸν καὶ τὸν πατέρα ἔχει 2:23a in the pre-text is reproduced verbatim in the ὑπόθεσις. The preceding words in the ὑπόθεσις, that the author demonstrates the unity of the Son with the Father, seem UP
SFĘFDU
UIF
TFDPOE
QBSU
PG
UIF
WFSTF
Ъ
ЪϪϭϩϭϡҀϫ
o
Зϳϣϧ 
0OF
TIPVME
OPUF
UIBU
UIF
ὑπόθεσις does not contain a Trinitarian statement, as it refers only to the unity of the Son and the Father (cf. ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν, Joh 10:30). It is therefore unlikely that the ὑπόθεσις reflects a Greek text that contained the Comma Johanneum (1 Joh 5:7).228 And he makes a distinction in this letter, saying that the hallmark of Antichrist (τὸ ἴδιον τοῦ ἀντιχρίστου) is the claim that Jesus was not the Son, Christ, so that it would not be clear. For, in making out as if it were not Him, the liar will say it is himself. Pre-text (1 Joh 2:22): τίς ἐστιν ὁ ψεύστης εἰ μὴ ὁ ἀρνούμενος ὅτι Ἰησοῦς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ χριστός; οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἀντίχριστος, ὁ ἀρνούμενος τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸν υἱόν The ὑπόθεσις agrees with the pre-text in the description of antichrist as one who denies that Jesus was the Christ, but adds the reason behind his action: That the liar does this in order to present himself as the Messiah. The ὑπόθεσις thus understands ἀντίχριστος OPU
BT
B
HFOFSBM
EFTJHOBUJPO
GPS
UIF
PQQPOFOUT
DG
o


CVU
BT
SFGFSSJOH
UP
.FTTJBI
pretenders. And at the end of the letter, he again reminds (ὑπομιμνῄσκει) them, saying that the Son of God is heavenly life and true God, and that we should serve Him (ἵνα τούτῳ δουλεύωμεν) and guard ourselves (φυλάττωμεν ἑαυτούς) against the idols. Pre-text (
+PI
o 
ϭХϢϟϪϣϫ
Ϣс
Юϰϧ
Ъ
ϱТч϶
ϰϭѼ
ϦϣϭѼ
ОϨϣϧ
Ϩϟх
ϢтϢϵϨϣϫ
КϪѴϫ
Ϣϧрϫϭϧϟϫ
ἵνα γινώσκωμεν τὸν ἀληθινόν· καὶ ἐσμὲν ἐν τῷ ἀληθινῷ, ἐν τῷ υἱῷ αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ. οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἀληθινὸς θεὸς καὶ ζωὴ αἰώνιος. Τεκνία, φυλάξατε ἑαυτὰ ἀπὸ τῶν εἰδώλων The ὑπόθεσις uses the meta-communicative verb ὑπομιμνῄσκει, which is justified by the οἴδαμεν in the pre-text. The pre-text is reproduced with some significant changes: (1) ζωὴ 228 Clarke (1857: VI, 932) mentions the ‘Synopsis of Scripture’ among ancient Greek witnesses that do not quote this verse. This work (otherwise known as Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae, see PG 
o
DPOUBJOT
the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις, and Clarke’s reference is thus to the present ὑπόθεσις.

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

185

αἰώνιος is replaced with ζωὴ οὐράνιος. (2) ἵνα γινώσκωμεν τὸν ἀληθινὸν καὶ ἐσμὲν ἐν τῷ ἀληθινῷ, ἐν τῷ υἱῷ αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ has been understood as an exhortation to serve Christ. The ὑπόθεσις refers to this exhortation with a ἵνα-clause with a first person plural subjunctive. In the pre-text, an ἵνα-clause is also found (ἵνα γινώσκωμεν τὸν ἀληθινόν), but this does not refer to an exhortation: In the pre-text, ἵνα γινωσκωμεν is dependent on διάνοιαν, which it explains.229 The ὑπόθεσις has transformed 5:20 into an exhortation of John. (3) The final exhortation in the pre-text φυλάξατε ἑαυτὰ ἀπὸ τῶν εἰδώλων has also been reformulated in the first person plural. (4) The ὑπόθεσις has in this way coordinated 5:20 and 5:21. Not only John’s original audience, but also the author and readers of the ὑπόθεσις are addressees of the exhortation. 2.3.7. Hypothesis of 2 John This he writes as an older man (ὡς πρεσβύτερος) to Cyria and her children. Pre-text (2 Joh 1:1a): Ὁ πρεσβύτερος ἐκλεκτῇ κυρίᾳ καὶ τοῖς τέκνοις αὐτῆς In the pre-text, ὁ πρεσβύτερος appears to be a title, although its meaning is debated.230 The ὑπόθεσις uses the word without the article, thus taking it as a reference to his age.231 It is clear from the context (the ὑπόθεσις of 1 John) that this ὑπόθεσις identifies him as the apostle John, and not as ‘John the Presbyter’.232 The word κυρία represents a problem both in the pre-text and in the ὑπόθεσις. It may be used as an appellative or as a proper name.233 In the present translation the second possibility is adopted. Moreover, the ὑπόθεσις has omitted the epithet ἐκλεκτή.234 And first, he praises (ἀποδέχεται) her children for walking honestly. Then teaching (διδάκσων) them that the mystery that [has come] to us is not new, he exhorts (παραινεῖ) 229 So Bultmann (1967: 92, n. 5): ‘Der ἵνα-Satz ist nicht von δέδωκεν abhängig, sondern expliziert das διάνοιαν.’ 230 Bultmann (1967: 95) adopts the view that the term here refers to the author as one of the πρεσβύτεροι who according to Papias (in Eusebius, H. E. iii, 39) were carriers of the apostolic tradition in Asia Minor. Also Strecker

o
JT
JODMJOFE
UP
IPME
UIJT
WJFX
*U
IBT
IPXFWFS
CFFO
PCKFDUFE
UIBU
UIF
VTF
PG
the term in Papias is quite different from its use in 2 and 3 John. In Papias it is used as a honorary title for others, while in the Johannine letters it occurs as a self-designation, see Klauck 1992: 32. 231 Cf. Theophylact (Commentary, PG 126: 69BC), who mentions two alternatives: Πρεσβύτερον δὲ μόνον ἑαυτὸν ἠξίωσε καλέσαι, ὅτι γηραιὸς ὢν ἤδη ἔγραψε ταύτας, ἢ ὅτι καὶ ἐπίσκοπον ἑαυτὸν ἐκάλεσε διὰ τοῦ πρεσβυτέρου, εἰωθότος, τὸ κατ᾽ ἐκεῖνο καιροῦ, καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐπισκόπων φέρεσθαι τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ πρεσβυτέρου. ‘He claimed to call himself presbyter only because he was now old when he wrote these letters, or because he also called himself bishop by the name presbyter, since at that time the name of presbyter was used also for bishops.’ 232 On the ancient idea that 2 and 3 John was his work, not the work of the apostle, see Strecker (1989: o
BOE
Klauck

o
BOE
U. Schnelle

o  233 Clarke (1857: VI, 936) notes that the Peshitta has retained ‘Kyria’ as a proper name. Bultmann (1967: 103) translates it as an appellative, but points out that most translators have overlooked the fact that the noun is anarthrous. He therefore prefers the translation of Jülicher, ‘an eine auserwählte Herrin.’ Jülicher/Fascher 1931: 233. 234 This was observed already by Bengel (1742: 1069): Synopsis Athanasiana ait, γράφει κυρίᾳ, ubi nomen proprium ponit, epitheton ἐκλεκτὴ, electa, reticet. ‘The Athanasian Synopsis says γράφει κυρίᾳ [writes Cyria], where it places the proper name but passes over the epithet ἐκλεκτὴ [elect].’ In general, Bengel was not interested in the ὑποθέσεις, since his aim above all was to extract meaning from the biblical text itself. The occasion for this rare digression was his need to refute the old view that the lady’s name was ‘Eclecta’.

186

Commentary

them again about love; that they should abide by the teaching that was handed down to them. Pre-text (
+PI
o 
ͽϳрϮϥϫ
ϩцϟϫ
Юϰϧ
ϣдϮϥϨϟ
ГϨ
ϰҀϫ
ϰтϨϫϵϫ
ϯϭϱ
ɀϣϮϧɀϟϰϭѼϫϰϟ϶
Гϫ
ἀληθείᾳ, καθὼς ἐντολὴν ἐλάβομεν παρὰ τοῦ πατρός. καὶ νῦν ἐρωτῶ σε, κυρία, οὐχ ὡς ἐντολὴν καινὴν γράφων σοι ἀλλὰ ἣν εἴχομεν ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς, ἵνα ἀγαπῶμεν ἀλλήλους. καὶ αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἀγάπη, ἵνα περιπατῶμεν κατὰ τὰς ἐντολὰς αὐτοῦ […] There is a close correspondence between the statements concerning the antiquity of the ἐντολή (in the pre-text) and the μυστήριον (in the ὑπόθεσις). This replacement is difficult to explain. One should note that the phrase in the μὴ νεώτερον εἶναι τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς μυστήριον also occurs in the ὑποθέσεις of Eph and 1 John. The fact that the same phrase is used in three ὑποθέσεις to describe different pre-texts suggests that it is not intended as a paraphrase of the pre-text, but should rather be considered as an independent statement. 2.3.8. Hypothesis of 3 John But he accuses (αἰτιᾶται) Diotrephes of not giving to the poor (παρέχοντα τοῖς πτωχοῖς), of preventing others and of speaking much foolishness. Pre-text (
+PI
o 
Ћϩϩ‫
ڍ‬Ъ
ϲϧϩϭɀϮϵϰϣъϵϫ
ϟЯϰҀϫ
ͅϧϭϰϮтϲϥ϶
ϭЯϨ
ГɀϧϢтϳϣϰϟϧ
КϪѩ϶
Ϣϧп
τοῦτο, ἐὰν ἔλθω, ὑπομνήσω αὐτοῦ τὰ ἔργα ἃ ποιεῖ, λόγοις πονηροῖς φλυαρῶν ἡμᾶς, καὶ μὴ ἀρκούμενος ἐπὶ τούτοις οὔτε αὐτὸς ἐπιδέχεται τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς καὶ τοὺς βουλομένους κωλύει καὶ ἐκ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἐκβάλλει. The ὑπόθεσις adds the meta-communicative verb αἰτιάομαι. The most important changes are the following: (1) The blame for not receiving the elder and his followers (ἡμᾶς) and for spreading false charges against them is omitted. Instead, the ὑπόθεσις refers to Diotrephes as speaking much foolishness generally. (2) In the ὑπόθεσις, Diotrephes is accused of not giving to the poor. This is an interesting interpretation of the ἐπιδέχεται τοὺς ἀδελφούς of the pre-text. In the pre-text, this probably refers to the supporting of itinerant missionaries or teachers.235 The ὑπόθεσις has a wider perspective: According to the opening of the ὑπόθεσις, the letter is ‘about hospitality’ (περὶ φιλοξενίας), hospitality here also include acts of charity in general (τοῖς πτωχοῖς παρέχειν). 2.3.9. Hypothesis of Jude And first, he exhorts (παρακαλεῖ) them to fight and to abide by the faith, which was handed down to them (τῇ παραδοθείσῃ αὐτοῖς). Pre-text (Jude 1:3b): ἀνάγκην ἔσχον γράψαι ὑμῖν παρακαλῶν ἐπαγωνίζεσθαι τῇ ἅπαξ παραδοθείσῃ τοῖς ἁγίοις πίστει The ὑπόθεσις adds the meta-communicative verb παρακαλει. This verb occurs only here in the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters. Here it reflects the παρακαλῶν in the pre-text. The ὑπόθεσις has replaced τοῖς ἁγίοις with αὐτοῖς.236 235 See Bultmann (1967: 100): ‘Diotrephes versagt auch den (wandernden) Brüdern die Gastfreundschaft.’ So also Strecker (1989: 369); Klauck

o
BOE
Schnelle

o  236 This change may be defended, since οἱ ἅγιοι may refer to the Christian community in general, so Paulsen (1992: 55): ‘Es handelt sich bei ἅγιοι nicht um eine Beschränkung auf die Apostel allein, gemeint ist viel-

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

187

It is therefore necessary to withdraw from such people. For even Michael the Archangel could not bear the blasphemy of the devil (οὐχ ὑπήνεγκε βλασφημίαν τοῦ διαβόλου). Pre-text (+VEF
o
γϪϭцϵ϶
Ϫтϫϰϭϧ
Ϩϟх
ϭжϰϭϧ
ГϫϱɀϫϧϟϤшϪϣϫϭϧ
ϯрϮϨϟ
Ϫсϫ
Ϫϧϟцϫϭϱϯϧϫ
κυριότητα δὲ ἀθετοῦσιν, δόξας δὲ βλασφημοῦσιν. ὁ δὲ Μιχαὴλ ὁ ἀρχάγγελος, ὅτε τῷ διαβόλῳ διακρινόμενος διελέγετο περὶ τοῦ Μωϋσέως σώματος, οὐκ ἐτόλμησεν κρίσιν ἐπενεγκεῖν βλασφημίας, ἀλλὰ εἶπεν· Ἐπιτιμήσαι σοι κύριος. The pre-text alludes to the apocryphal story of Michael contending with the devil over the body of Moses. This story is according to the testimony list of the Euthalian apparatus found in a Μωϋσέως ἀπόκρυφον. From this writing, the words ἐπιτιμήσαι σοι ὁ Κύριος (1:9) were allegedly quoted.237 A difficult phrase in the pre-text is κρίσιν ἐπενεγκεῖν βλασφημίας. The genitive may be understood as (1) an objective genitive referring to the blasphemy of the devil, which Michael did not condemn, or as (2) a descriptive genitive that describes the κρίσις itself as containing βλασφημία. In the latter case, the idea is that Michael did not bring a slanderous accusation against the devil, but left the matter to God.238 In the pre-text, Michael is used as a paradigm: With his reliance on the authority of the Lord, Michael serves as a contrast to the opponents who reject authority (κυριότητα ἀθετοῦσιν). The ὑπόθεσις highlights another aspect of the story, saying that Michael could not bear (ὑπενεγκεῖν) the slander or blasphemy of the devil (βλασφημία τοῦ διαβόλου). The example of Michael here has another function, illustrating the importance of staying away from the deceivers (δεῖ ἀπὸ τούτων ἀναχωρεῖν). The idea is that when even Michael could not endure the blasphemy of the devil, the believers should likewise avoid the blasphemy of the deceivers. The ὑπόθεσις uses words that are similar to the language of the pre-text. The change of ἐπενεγκεῖν to ὑπενεγκεῖν affects only a single letter. It is difficult to say whether the ὑπόθεσις here represents a conscious reworking of the text or simply a misinterpretation of it.239 And, having prayed for the confirmation of their faith by the Lord, he ends the letter. Pre-text (+VEF
o 
ϰҁ
Ϣс
ϢϱϫϟϪтϫѾ
ϲϱϩрϬϟϧ
аϪѩ϶
Ћɀϰϟцϯϰϭϱ϶
Ϩϟх
ϯϰѮϯϟϧ
Ϩϟϰϣϫьɀϧϭϫ
τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ ἀμώμους ἐν ἀγαλλιάσει μόνῳ θεῷ σωτῆρι ἡμῶν διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν δόξα μεγαλωσύνη κράτος καὶ ἐξουσία πρὸ παντὸς τοῦ αἰῶνος καὶ νῦν καὶ εἰς πάντας τοὺς αἰῶνας· ἀμήν. ćF
EPYPMPHZ
JO
o
JT
UIF
POMZ
QBTTBHF
UIBU
JT
SFGFSSFE
UP
BT
BO
BDU
PG
QSBZFS
(ἐπεύχομαι) in the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters. This description of the text may mehr die ganze Gemeinde.’ 237 See the Euthalian list of testimonies (Zacagni 1698: 485 = PG 85: 676A): Ἰούδα Ἐπιστολή. Μωϋσέως ἀποκρύφου α´· Ἐπιτιμήσαι σοι ὁ Κύριος. ‘The letter of Jude. One from the Apocryphon of Moses: May the Lord rebuke you.’ 238 These interpretations are discussed by Paulsen (1992: 68), who prefers the second alternative: ‘Michael, obwohl ἀρχάγγελος, hat kein Urteil gegen den Satan ausgesprochen, das eine βλασφημία enthalten hätte, sondern dies Gott überlassen.’ So also A. Vögtle (1994: 61): ‘Der Ausdruck κρίσιν βλασφημίας in Jud 9 meint ein richtendes Schmähurteil.’ 239 A similar idea, as well as many others, is found in Theophylact (Commentary, PG

%o" 
γ
Ϫсϫ
Μιχαὴλ, φησὶν, οὕτως οὐδὲ κατὰ ἀνδρὸς, ἤτοι τοῦ Μωϋσέως, ἠνέσχετο τῶν τοῦ διαβόλου βλασφημιῶν. ‘Michael, he says, could thus not bear the blasphemies of the devil against a man, indeed against Moses.’ The blasphemies of the devil against Moses refer to the killing of the Egyptian (96B).

188

Commentary

be defended inasmuch as the doxologic genre presupposes the use of the optative or its equivalent (e.g. δόξα [εἴη] τῷ θεῷ…). The ὑπόθεσις describes it as a prayer for the confirmation (βεβαιότης) of their faith. This description is based on the first part of the doxology that describes Christ as ‘Him who is able (τῷ δυναμένῳ) to keep you from the falling’. The ὑπόθεσις has made this clause the object of the prayer. 2.3.10. The Hypotheses of the Catholic Letters: Summary The meta-terminology Thanksgiving. The ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters do not use εὐχαριστία/εὐχαριστέω. Although the Catholic letters do not as a rule open with thanksgivings (as the Pauline letters do), there are nevertheless texts that could have received this designation.240 Prayer. The ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters rarely use εὐχή/εὔχομαι (προς-). The related verb ἐπεύχομαι is used once as a text-deiction (with reference to +VE
o 
ćF
other occurrence is in the ὑπόθεσις of 1 John, which refers to a statement about prayer (1 Joh 5:16). Paraenesis. As a previous study has demonstrated, a flexible terminology is used for ethical exhortation. Although the nominal form παραινετικοὶ λόγοι is not found, the verb παραινέω occurs (ὑποθέσεις of 1 Pet, 2 Pet, 1 Joh, 2 Joh). Προτρέπω may also be used of moral exhortation (ὑποθέσεις of Jas, 1 Pet, 3 Joh), and once, παρακαλῶ (ὑπόθεσις of Jude). In this context, the phrase εἰς τὰ ἤθη is found twice (ὑποθέσεις of 1 Pet and Jud), in both instances with the verb παραινέω.241 The paraphrase The ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters occasionally use scraps from the pre-text to express a new meaning. This occurs in the paraphrase of +VEF
o
XIFSF
UIF
FYBNQMF
PG
.Jchael serves another purpose than that of the pre-text. Similar transformations are found in the paraphrases of 
1FU
o
BOE
1 Pet 4:6. It is not clear whether these are intended changes or represent a misunderstanding of the biblical text. The ‘Paulusbild’ Also the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters contribute to the ‘Paulusbild’ of the Euthalian apparatus. The transformation of 
1FU
o
JOUP
BO
FYIPSUBUJPO
UP
AMPWF
UIF
XSJUJOHT
of the Apostle’ is remarkable, especially since the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters do not use the title ‘apostle’ for the authors. Even if the authors of the major Catholic letters were considered apostles in the ὑποθέσεις as well, this is passed over in silence. This is in agreement with the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters, where Paul seems to be ‘the Apostle’ par excellence.

240 See the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι to the Catholic letters. 241 On the terminology of the ὑποθέσεις to describe moral exhortation, see Hellholm/Blomkvist 2004: o
"QQ
**
339o340).

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

189

2.4. Hypothesis of Acts Hypothesis of the Book of the Acts

The heading of the ὑπόθεσις refers to Acts as ‘The Book of the Acts’ (τὸ βιβλίον τῶν πράξεων).242 In this, it differs from the Euthalian Prologue to Acts, which refers to Acts as ἡ βίβλος τῶν ἀποστολικῶν πράξεων. It also differs from the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, which use the title Πράξεις. The use of different titles bears witness to the complex origin of the apparatus. The opening of the ὑπόθεσις is transmitted in various forms. von Soden notes the following main variants:243 [Variant I] The narrator of the Acts of the Apostles is Luke the evangelist. For he was an Antiochene by birth and a physician by profession. [Variant II] The book is called the Acts of the Apostles, because it contains the acts of all the apostles. The narrator is Luke the evangelist, who wrote this book also.244 [Variant III] The book is called the Acts of the Apostles, because it contains the acts of all the apostles. The narrator is Luke the evangelist, who wrote this book also. For he was an Antiochene by birth and a physician by profession.

Variant I is considered the simplest form by von Soden. Variant II adds the explanation of the title, while it omits the biographical data of Luke. von Soden considers Variant III a conflation of I and II, since it includes both the explanation of the title and the biographical data. I find this argument convincing. Regarding I and II, the question of priority is difficult to answer at the present stage of research. Variant II reflects a pattern known elsewhere in the apparatus. Both in the Διὰ τί and in the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters, the explanation of the title is a regular feature.245 A survey of the distribution of the variants in the manuscripts may shed more light on this question. For the present translation, it was decided to use the simple form that seems to be independent of the other Euthalian ὑποθέσεις. Variant I opens with the identification of the narrator (διηγούμενος) as Luke the evangelist. This follows from Acts 1:1, where the author refers to the Gospel as his first book (λόγος). The term διηγούμενος has a close parallell in Luke 1:1 (διήγησις). The biographical data are derived from tradition, and not from the pre-text. The idea that he was a physician is widespread due to his identification with Luke the physician in Col 4:14. His Antiochene origin is, on the other hand, first mentioned by Eusebius.246 The sources, 242 Sometimes expanded with τῶν ἀποστόλων or τῶν ἁγίων ἀποστόλων, see von Soden 1902: 331. 243 See von Soden 1902: 331. 244 Πράξεις ἀποστόλων τὸ βιβλίον καλεῖται, ἐπειδὴ τὰς πράξεις ὁμοῦ τῶν ἀποστόλων περιέχει, ὁ δὲ διηγούμενος ταῦτα ἐστὶν Λουκᾶς ὁ ευαγγελιστὴς ὁ καὶ τοῦτο τὸ βιβλίον συγγράφων. See von Soden 1902: 331. 245 A necessary presupposition is that the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters originally exhibited this feature. The text form beginning with ἐπειδή cannot be original, as the causal clause is only possible if the words οὕτως καλεῖται (vel sim.) preceded, see von Dobschütz 1893: 70. 246 See W. G. Kümmel 1975: 147. The so-called Anti-Marcionite prologue to Luke also has this information, but the date of this prologue is uncertain, see Jervell

o

190

Commentary

if there were any, on which Eusebius based this assumption are unknown. Haenchen suggested that the assumption rests on a ‘Western’ variant of the text of Acts. According to Haenchen, Eusebius read συνεστραμμένων δὲ ἡμῶν ‘when we were gathered’ in Acts 11:28. Thus, the first mention of ‘we’ would be in the description of the Antiochian church. The author had thus identified himself indirectly in the text.247 Bengel had a similar idea, as he conjectured that Eusebius had identified Luke with Lucius of Cyrene (Acts 13:1), who is mentioned among the prophets and teachers in the church of Antioch.248 Regardless of how Luke became connected to Antioch in the history of interpretation, the question whether the ὑπόθεσις here is based on Eusebius should be examined.249 The language used in this context by Eusebius and the ὑπόθεσις is quite similar: Euthalian ὑπόθεσις: Ἀντιοχεὺς γὰρ οὗτος ὑπάρχων τὸ γένος ἰατρός τε τὴν ἐπιστήμην. Eusebius (H. E. iii, 4, 6): Λουκᾶς δὲ τὸ μὲν γένος ὢν τῶν ἀπ᾽ Ἀντιοχείας, τὴν ἐπιστήμην δὲ ἰατρός. The style of the Euthalian ὑπόθεσις is less sophisticated than Eusebius, as it uses the simple Ἀντιοχεύς instead of the more elaborate expression τῶν ἀπ᾽ Ἀντιοχείας. Moreover, the ὑπόθεσις does not balance the statement with μέν … δέ, as in Eusebius. The following words in the ὑπόθεσις has also a close parallell in the same passage in Eusebius: For he was traveling with the other apostles, and with Paul in particular ὑπόθεσις: συναπεδημεῖ γὰρ τοῖς τε ἄλλοις ἀποστόλοις καὶ μάλιστα τῷ Παύλῳ Eusebius (H. E. iii, 4, 6): τὰ πλεῖστα συγγεγονὼς τῷ Παύλῳ, καὶ τοῖς λοιποῖς δὲ οὐ παρέργως τῶν ἀποστόλων ὡμιληκώς

Again, the ὑπόθεσις has a more simple and straightforward style than that of Eusebius. In Eusebius, there is apparently a distinction between Luke being a companion (συγγεγονώς) of Paul, and his communication or association (ὡμιληκώς) with the other apostles. This distinction is lost in the ὑπόθεσις, where Luke is said to have traveled with the other apostles as well. This seems to favor the view that the text of Eusebius is the pretext, and that the ὑπόθεσις has simplified the account. The idea that Luke traveled with Paul has a basis in the so-called ‘we’ texts in Acts, where the author gives the impression of being an eyewitness.250 … and wrote accurately what he knows

According to the Euthalian ὑπόθεσις, the accuracy of Luke in the composition of Acts follows from his companionship with Paul. The same thought is also expressed by Eusebius, who mentions the different methods Luke used in composing his two volumes; in the first he was a transmitter of reliable traditions, in the second he reports what he has seen himself (H. E. iii, 4, 6). 247 See Haenchen 1965: 11. Pervo (2009: 296 n. 62) remarks that ‘we’ does not occur after the arrival of new characters in Acts and thinks that the D-text here reflects a preference for eyewitness accounts in (Christian) texts from the 2nd century. 248 See Bengel 1773/1855: 133. 249 Harris demonstrated that Euthalius sometimes is very close to Eusebius. With respect to the biographical data of Luke, Harris (1896: 69n) drew attention to material in the Euthalian Prologue to Acts and Eusebius H. E. iii, 4, 6. In the present study, it is observed that this applies also to the ὑπόθεσις of Acts. 250 "DUT
o
o
o
o
0O
UIFTF
UFYUT
TFF
Haenchen

o
Kümmel 1975: o
Jervell

o
H. Conzelmann

YYYWJJJoYM
D.-A. Koch 2008.

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

191

Thus, the entire description of Luke in the ὑπόθεσις appears to be an epitome of Eusebius, written in a simplified style. Another explanation could be that Eusebius has incorporated elements from a pre-existing ὑπόθεσις into his work, and, in doing this, has improved it stylistically. This seems less likely, especially as Eusebius in this passage treats both the Gospel and the Acts. He narrates in the book how the Lord was taken up (ἀνελήφθη) by angels who lifted Him up (ὑπολαβόντων) Pre-text (Acts 1:9b): ἐπήρθη καὶ νεφέλη ὑπέλαβεν αὐτὸν […] This description of the ascension of Christ goes beyond that of the pre-text. The cloud is replaced by angels. Accordingly, ὑπολαμβάνω is probably used in the sense ‘take up from below’ (LSJ) and is rendered ‘lift up’ in my translation. In the pre-text, where the cloud is the subject, the sense of the verb may be closer to ‘receive’, hence, ‘conceal’.251 That the ascencion was effected through angels, is not unexpected. According to the pre-text, the return of Christ will happen in the same way as his ascent into heaven (1:11). Thus, the coming of Christ with angels (eg Jud 1:14) corresponds to his being carried up to heaven by them. The angels represent the divine action. One may compare the account of the resurrection and the ascension as one and the same event in Codex Bobiensis (Mark 16:4), where angels ascend with Christ into heaven.252 The corresponding image is that of Christ being received by a cloud (Acts 1:9) and returning with (or on) the clouds in the parousia (Mark 13:26; 14:62; Rev 1:7; cf. Dan 7:13). The two images may be combined by interpreting the clouds as angels.253 Such an interpretation seems to underlie the ὑπόθεσις, even though the shift from the singular (νεφέλη) to plural (ἄγγελοι) is problematic. … and how the Holy Spirit was poured out at Pentecost upon the apostles and all those present
o , the appointing (κατάστασις) of Matthias in place of Judas the traitor o , the appointing (κατάστασις) of the seven deacons o , the electing (ἐκλογή) of Paul o and what he went through
o , and, finally, his voyage to Rome o .

An interesting feature of the ὑπόθεσις is that the order of the events has been changed. The coming of the Holy Spirit is placed before the appointing of Matthias. This is probably because the ὑπόθεσις places the most important event first. It is reasonable that the Spirit, which plays a fundamental role in the book, is mentioned before the appointing of Matthias. As for the selection of events, the ὑπόθεσις focuses on Matthias, the deacons and Paul. The meta-term κατάστασις reflects the verb καταστήσομεν in the pre-text (6:3, cf. ἔστησαν 1:23). This term contrasts with the meta-term ἐκλογή for the election of Paul. This term is also derived from the pre-text (cf. σκεῦος ἐκλογῆς, 9:15). The result is B
DVSJPVT
TVNNBSZ
PG
"DUT
ćF
EFTDSJQUJPO
PG
UIF
CVML
PG
UIF
CPPL
o
TJNQMZ
as ‘what Paul went through’ is not very helpful to the reader. It must be said that the asym251 ‘[I]n ὑπολαμβάνω liegt hier das Moment des Verbergens und des Trennens’, Haenchen 1965: 116 n. 4; ‚‘er wurde durch eine Wolke aufgenommen, so dass er ihren Blicken entschwand’, Jervell 1998: 116. 252 Et descenderunt de caelis angeli et […] simul ascenderunt cum eo. ‘And angels descended from the sky and … they ascended together with him.’ Text in B. Metzger

o


XIP
BMTP
ESBXT
BUUFOUJPO
UP
B
TJNJMBS
EFTDSJQUJPO
JO
UIF
(PTQFM
PG
1FUFS
ff
o 
)FSF
UIF
BOHFMT
QMBZ
B
NPSF
BDUJWF
SPMF
CSJOHJOH
Jesus out of the tomb. 253 This identification is known in rabbinic exegesis of Dan 7:13, see J. J. Collins 1993: 311.

192

Commentary

metry between pre-text and ὑπόθεσις in this case is extreme. In this, the ὑπόθεσις of Acts stands out when compared to the ὑποθέσεις of the letters. The question is how to explain this remarkable asymmetry. A possible explanation may be that the text is not composed as a complete ὑπόθεσις but is rather an introduction to lists of various kinds. According to von Soden, the ὑπόθεσις of Acts is in the majority of manuscripts followed by a list of apostles and deacons and also a list of wonders (see below). The ὑπόθεσις seems to presuppose the list of apostles and deacons. A related text is the gloss on the on the voyage (πλοῦς) of Paul to Rome.254 Possibly, the actual pre-texts of the ὑπόθεσις may be lists and glosses of this kind that were already present in the tradition. Thus, the ὑπόθεσις may reflect two kinds of scholarly activity. On the one hand, an independent work with the text of Acts (the meta-terms used in the ὑπόθεσις may indicate this), and the secondary reworking of already existing lists on the other. It is of course impossible to separate these elements with any certainty. Regarding the ‘Paulusbild’ of the ὑπόθεσις, there are two points worth noting: 1. Paul is elected, but he is not said to be an apostle. The different meta-terms (κατάστασις and ἐκλογή) indicate that Paul has a special status, but the title ‘apostle’ is not used for him. This is in agreement with the text of the Acts, but in conflict with the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters, where Paul is described as ‘the Apostle’ (ὁ ἀπόστολος). 2. Paul, the apostles and the deacons, are not depicted as wonder-workers. This is in contrast to other auxiliary material to Acts in the apparatus, especially the List of Wonders.

2.5. The List of Apostles and Deacons According to von Soden, a list of apostles and deacons is frequently found immediately after the ὑπόθεσις of Acts.255 The list is made on the basis of Acts 1:13.26 and 6:5. The list is concluded with a paragraph on the election of Paul and his mission with Barnabas ‘to preach the Lord to the Gentiles everywhere’.

2.6. The List of Wonders This list is often followed by a list of the wonders (σημεῖα) in Acts.256 Apart from the metaterm σημεῖα, the list is based on Acts, and includes in the category of σημεῖα all kinds 254 The text seems based on glosses to the text of Acts and runs as follows: Πλοῦς Παύλου ἀποστόλου εἰς Ῥώμην. Ὁ ἑκατοντάρχης ὁ ἀπαγαγὼν τὸν Παῦλον εἰς Ῥώμην, Ἰούλιος ἦν ὄνομα αὐτῷ, ἐκ σπείρης τῆς λεγομένης Σεβαστῆς. Συνῆν δὲ αὐτῷ Λουκᾶς καὶ Ἀρίσταρχος. τὸ δὲ πλοῖον Ἀνδραμυτινὸν ἐτύγχανεν. Ἐνέβησαν δὲ αὐτῷ ἀπὸ Καισαρείας ἕως Λύστραν, κἀκεῖθεν ἀλεξανδρινὸν ἔλαβον ἕως Μελίτη τῆς Νήσου, καὶ πάλιν ἀλεξανδρινὸν ἕτερον εὑρόντες παράσημον τοῖς Διοσκούροις ἐνέβησαν καὶ τούτῳ καὶ εἰς Ῥώμην οὕτως ἀνήχθησαν. ‘The Voyage of Paul the Apostle to Rome. The centurion who led Paul to Rome was called Julius, a man of the cohort called the Augustan. Luke and Aristarch were with him. They went on board a ship from Adramyttium, going from Caesarea to Lystra. And from there they took an Alexandrian ship till they reached the island of Malta. Having again found another Alexandrian ship, dedicated to the Dioscouri, they boarded this also, and thus they sailed to Rome.’ Text in von Soden 1902: 366. Willard 

o
OPUFE
UIBU
UIJT
QJFDF
IBT
OP
ĕYFE
QMBDF
JO
UIF
NBOVTDSJQUT
255 See von Soden

o 256 See von Soden

o
ćJT
UFYU
JT
GPVOE
BMTP
JO
UIF
DPNNFOUBSZ
PO
"DUT
BTDSJCFE
UP
ćFPQIZMBDU
(PG 
#o# 
)FSF
UIF
MJTU
IBT
OVNCFST
DPVOUJOH
UXFOUZPOF
XPOEFST
JO
BMM
ćF
UFYU
GPMMPXT
immediately after the ὑπόθεσις of Acts, without the lists of apostles and deacons.

Commentary on the ὑποθέσεις

193

PG
XPOESPVT
BDUT
JODMVEJOH
WJTJPOT
FH
1FUFST
WJTJPO
o
BOE
QVOJUJWF
NJSBDMFT
FH
UIF
EFBUI
PG
"OBOJBT
BOE
4BQQIJSB
o 
*U
EPFT
OPU
TUSJDUMZ
GPMMPX
UIF
PSEFS
of Acts but organizes the material around the wonder workers in Acts.257 Even if the list may seem insignificant, it should be noted that it is one of the few items in the apparatus that focus on Paul as a wonder worker since the ὑπόθεσις of Acts does not mention these actions of Paul at all.

2.7. The Hypotheses: Summary In previous research on the Euthalian apparatus, scholars have given the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις relatively little attention. For scholars like Robinson, who considered the ὑποθέσεις secondary in relation to the Euthalian prologues, they were not the center of interest, since they, by definition, were ‘spurious’. But the ὑποθέσεις represent a work which may be studied for its own sake, and which in particular has an interesting metaterminology, as Dahl observed.258 The meta-terminology The present commentary has demonstrated that the hypotheses’ meta-terminology, although interesting, is not an entirely adequate tool to describe the apostolic writings: The ὑποθέσεις pay little attention to literary forms in the letters that belong to the JewishChristian sphere, such as thanksgivings, benedictions, doxologies and prayers. On the other hand, the terminology used to describe moral exhortation is flexible, and in this way one may see the ὑποθέσεις as representing essentially a Greek paideia. This learning is applied to the biblical writings without any particular attention being paid to their Jewish-Christian literary forms. The significance of the meta-terminology for the question of authorship. Another aspect is noteworthy: The meta-terminology throughout the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline and of the Catholic letters is quite homogenous. That these ὑποθέσεις are written in the same style is evident for every reader, and von Soden goes so far as to saying that they doubtless are all by the same author, although he (as an afterthought) admits that the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters may be imitations, made by a later hand.259 This question cannot be answered here. The evidence examined in the present commentary shows, however, that the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline and Catholic letters appear to belong together. In contrast to the evidence of the prologues, the evidence of the ὑποθέσεις does not suggest that Acts and the Catholic letters belonged together in one volume. One rather gets the impression that the book of Acts is viewed from a great distance. The ὑπόθεσις of Acts is a curious work. It is poorly written, by far the most incomplete in the entire set. If the length of the pre-text is taken into consideration, it is also found to be very short. This sets it apart from the other ὑποθέσεις, and one may assume that the piece originally did not belong to the set.

257
ćVT
1FUFST
WJTJPO
o
JT
UPME
CFGPSF
UIF
TUPSZ
PG
1BVMT
WJTJPO
PO
UIF
SPBE
UP
%BNBTDVT
o  258 See Dahl
E
o 259 See von Soden 1902: 339.

194

Commentary

The ’Paulusbild’ The ὑποθέσεις of both the Pauline and the Catholic letters describe Paul as ‘the Apostle’ and do not use the title ‘apostle’ for the others. In general, one may say that Paul here outshines all the others. On the other hand, Paul is never called ‘the holy Apostle’, or the ‘divine’ or ‘blessed’ Apostle as often in the tradition. Again, the ὑπόθεσις of Acts differs from the others. It uses the title ‘apostle’ with reference to the twelve apostle, but not with reference to Paul, who is, however, described as σκεῦος ἐκλογῆς. In this description, it betrays its dependence on the pre-text (Acts 9:15).

3. Commentary on the Prologues 3.1. The Genre ‘Prologue’ The term πρόλογος may be used in a wide sense, of anything that precedes the work (λόγος). In this sense it is apparently used by Brock, who refers to all the Euthalian introductory material, including the list of Old Testament quotations as the ‘Euthalian prologue’.260 This use of the term is rare in the secondary literature on Euthalius. In the present commentary, the definition used in Hennig Brinkmann’s study of the medieval prologue is adopted: According to Brinkmann, the prologue is the opening of communication between the author and the reader.261 The author usually speaks in the first person. With regard to this, there is a difference between the genre ‘prologue’ on the one hand and the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the ὑποθέσεις on the other: In κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and ὑποθέσεις, the first person is usually not employed. This difference in style reflects a difference in function: The prologue usually contains a personal element, as it aims to establish a relationship between the author and his readers. According to Brinkmann, the prologue has two main functions: (a) to win the benevolence of the reader, and (b) to introduce the reader to the subject matter of the work. Brinkmann finds that the prologues to ancient drama (i.e. the prologue speeches that often open them) had no influence on the theory of the prologue in medieval times, since the ancient dramatic tradition ceased to exist.262 But a relatively clear division between these two functions is found also in the ancient theory of drama. An influence from drama or from the theory of drama cannot be completely ruled out. Evanthius distinguishes between four kinds of prologues in comedy: (1) The commendatory, where the play is commended to the audience; (2) the responsive, where the author criticizes his adversaries or praises the audience; (3) the dramatic, which offers an exposition of the plot; and (4) the mixed. In addition he mentions the difference between ‘prologue’ and ‘prologium’. This twofold division appears to be a simplification of the previous division into four types. The first (the ‘prologue’) may contain the author’s excuses or his commendation of the play. Thus it combines the commendatory and responsive functions. The second (the ‘prologium’) treats the plot only, and thus has the function of the ‘dramatic’ prologue in the fourfold division. Although there is a certain amount of confusion in this 260 See Brock 1979: 121. Cf. also the quotation from Evanthius below. 261 See Brinkmann 1964: 1. 262 See Brinkmann 1964: 1.

Commentary on the Prologues

195

terminology, the ancient theory distinguishes clearly between winning the benevolence of the audience and introducing the audience to the world of the play.263 The distinction between ‘prologue’ and ‘prologium’ corresponds to the distinction between (a) prologus praeter rem, which serves to introduce the author to the reader and win his or her benevolence, and (b) prologus ante rem, which serves to introduce the reader to the contents of the work.264 Since these terms are more precise than the pair ‘prologue’/‘prologium’ of Evanthius, they are used in the present commentary on Euthalius. The terms prologus praeter rem / ante rem are not genre-designations, but pragmatic terms that describe the function of various sub-texts. A prologue may also be given an epistolary form and appear as a dedicatory letter. This is the case in the Onomasticon of Pollux (2nd cent.). This short dedicatory letter may here serve as an illustration of the genre ‘prologue’: Pollux, Onomasticon, I,1. Dedicatory letter to Commodus, text and trans. in Trapp 2003: 143 (rev.). [Prologus praeter rem] Ἰούλιος Πολυδεύκης Κομμόδῳ Καίσαρι χαίρειν. ὦ παῖ πατρὸς ἀγαθοῦ, πατρῷόν ἐστί σοι κτῆμα κατ᾽ ἴσον βασιλεία τε καὶ σφοία. τῆς δὲ σοφίας τὸ μέν τι ἐν τῇ τῆς ψυχῆς ἀρετῇ, τὸ δ᾽ ἐν τῇ χρείᾳ τῆς φωνῆς. τῆς μὲν οὖν ἀρετῆς ἔχεις τὸ μάθημα ἐν τῷ πατρί, τῆς δὲ φωνῆς, εἰ μὲν ἦγεν αὐτὸς σχολήν, παρεῖχεν ἄν σοι τὸ ἡμῶν ἐλάχιστα δεῖσθαι· ἐπεὶ δ᾽ ἐκεῖνον ἡ σωτηρία τῆς οἰκουμένης ἀπασχολεῖ, ἔγωγ᾽ οὖν ἕν γέ τι σοι πρὸς εὐγλωττίαν συμβαλοῦμαι.

[Prologus praeter rem] Julius Pollux to Commodus Caesar, greetings. O son of a noble father, kingship and wisdom alike are your paternal inheritance. Of wisdom, part lies in the virtue of the soul, and part in the use of voice. As far as virtue is concerned, you have your model in your father; as for the voice, if he himself had the leisure, he would ensure that you had minimal need of me. But since he is preoccupied with the preservation of the inhabited world, I can make you at least this one contribution to the cultivation of eloquence.

263 Evanthius (De comoedia
WJJ
o 
Comoedia autem dividitur in quattuor partes: prologum, πρότασιν, ἐπίτασιν, καταστροφήν. Prologus est prima dictio, a Graecis dicta πρῶτος λόγος vel antecedens veram fabulae compositionem elocutio, . eius species sunt quattuor: συστατικός commendativus, quo poeta vel fabula commendatur; ἐπιτιμητικός relativus, quo aut adversario maledictum aut populo gratiae referuntur; δραματικός argumentativus, exponens fabulae argumentum; μικτός mixtus, omnia haec in se continens. inter prologum et prologium quidam hoc interesse voluerunt quod prologus est, ubi aut poeta excusatur aut fabula commendatur, prologium autem est, cum tantum de argumento dicitur. ‘A comedy is divided into four parts: Prologue, πρότασις, ἐπίτασις, καταστροφή. The prologue is UIF
ĕSTU
TQFFDI
CZ
UIF
(SFFLT
DBMMFE
ɀϮҀϰϭ϶
ϩшϡϭ϶
PS
UIF
TQFFDI
UIBU
QSFDFEFT
UIF
BDUVBM
QMBZ
Ъ
ɀϮч
ϰϭѼ
ϢϮрϪϟϰϭ϶
ϩшϡϭ϶
ćFSF
BSF
GPVS
LJOET
PG
JU
ϯϱϯϰϟϰϧϨш϶
DPNNFOEBUPSZ
CZ
XIJDI
UIF
BVUIPS
PS
UIF
QMBZ
is commended. Ἐπιτιμητικός responsive, by which either an adversary is abused or the audience is praised. δραματικός dramatic, bringing an exposition of the plot of the play; μικτός mixed, containing all these things. Somebody wanted to distinguish between the prologue and the prologium; the prologue is where either the author excuses himself or where the play is commended, the prologium, on the other hand, is where only the plot is spoken about.’ 264 On this terminology, see Brinkmann

o


196

Commentary

Pollux, Onomasticon, I,1. Dedicatory letter to Commodus, text and trans. in Trapp 2003: 143 (rev.). [Prologus ante rem] Ὀνομαστικὸν μὲν οὖν τῷ βιβλίῳ τὸ ἐπίγραμμα, μηνύει δὲ ὅσα τε συνώνυμα ὡς ὑπαλάττειν δύνασθαι, καὶ οἷς ἂν ἕκαστα δηλωθείη. πεφιλοτίμηται γὰρ οὐ τοσοῦτον εἰς πλῆθος ὁπόσον εἰς κάλλους ἐκλογήν. οὐ μέντοι πάντα τὰ ὀνόματα περιείληφε τουτὶ τὸ βιβλίον· οὐδὲ γὰρ ἦν ῥᾴδιον ἑνὶ βιβλίῳ πάντα συλλαβεῖν. ποιήσομαι δὲ τὴν ἀρχὴν ἀφ᾽ ὧν μάλιστα προσήκει τοὺς εὐσεβεῖς, ἀπὸ τῶν θεῶν· τὰ δ᾽ ἄλλα ὡς ἂν ἕκαστον ἐπέλθῃ τάξομεν. ἔρρωσο.

[Prologus ante rem] ‘Vocabulary’ then is the title of this work; it sets out which words are synonyms and thus interchangeable, and which words denote what. I have striven not so much for quantity as for elegant selection. This book does not however contain all words, as it would be no easy task to encompass everything in a single volume. I will begin where the most pious most properly should, with the gods; the rest I will arrange as each item occurs to me. Farewell.

In the Onomasticon, similar letters are prefixed to each book of the work.265 The three Euthalian prologues also follow this scheme, having the prologus praeter rem first. It has also been suggested that the Euthalian prologues once appeared as letters.266 The genre-designation in common use for the prologus praeter rem is ‘prooemium’. The characteristics of this genre is treated below. The prologus ante rem is more difficult to describe, as its contents depend on the genre of the work.

3.2. Commentary on the Prologue to the Letters of Paul 3.2.1. Structure of the Prologue to the Letters of Paul The Prologue to the Letters of Paul may be divided into two main parts according to the theory discussed above. The prologus ante rem is in this case quite complex, consisting mainly of pieces that pertain to the work of Paul (the ‘Life’, the ‘Epitome’ and the ‘Chronicle’), but also one piece that pertains to the work of Euthalius (‘Editorial notice’). There are no headings for these pieces in the Greek manuscripts, but some of these genre-designations appear in the text (see the commentary below). (1) Prologus praeter rem: Prooemium (2) Prologus ante rem: Life of Paul, Epitome of the Pauline Letters, Editorial Notice, Chronicle of the Preaching of Paul There is a structural problem with the Prologue to the Letters of Paul that indicates that it has been produced in stages. After the biography of Paul has been narrated in the ‘Life’, there follows another treatment of the same subject in the ‘Chronicle’. The ‘Chronicle’ is probably secondary. The most important reason for this assumption is the tension between the ‘Life’ and the ‘Chronicle’: According to the ‘Life’, Paul died as a martyr shortly after his arrival in Rome. The ‘Chronicle’, on the other hand, tells that he was released and preached the gospel for ten more years, the time between his first and second defense

265 See Trapp

o 266 See Harris 1893: 82, and below.

Commentary on the Prologues

197

before Nero.267 The ‘Chronicle’ seems, however, to have been appended to the Euthalian prologue at an early stage, since the Euthalian prologue is not transmitted without it.268 3.2.2. The Heading to the Prologue to the Letters of Paul The heading to The Prologue to the Letters of Paul is transmitted in many different forms. Zacagni, following his main witness 181, prints the heading as follows: Εὐθαλίου ἐπισκόπου Σούλκης πρόλογος προτασσόμενος τῶν δεκατεσσάρων ἐπιστολῶν Παύλου τοῦ ἁγίου ἀποστόλου. von Soden, on the other hand, considers the following form the original: Πρόλογος Εὐθαλίου διακόνου προτασσόμενος τῆς βίβλου τῶν ἐπιστολῶν Παύλου τοῦ ἀποστόλου. The most detailed discussion of the headings is found in the first study by von Dobschütz, who divides the manuscripts into three classes: (1) Manuscripts without the name of the author; (2) Manuscripts with the author’s name as Εὐθαλίου διακόνου; and (3) Manuscripts with the author’s name as Εὐθαλίου ἐπισκόπου Σούλκης. Of these, he thinks that (1) is closer to the original, presumably a short form like πρόλογος τῶν δεκατεσσάρων ἐπιστολῶν Παύλου τοῦ ἀποστόλου. According to von Dobschütz, the author had placed his own name and the name of the addressee elsewhere on the codex, and later scribes transferred the name Εὐθαλίου with his title as deacon or bishop to the heading.269 A different theory was proposed by Harris, who considered the headings in the manuscripts with the designation πρόλογος secondary. The original heading was according to Harris in the form of an epistolary prescript.270 At the present stage of research, it is difficult to evaluate the different hypotheses. A new edition of the text is needed before its history can be described. 3.2.3. Prologus praeter rem 3.2.3.1. The Genre ‘Prooemium’ The designation ‘prooemium’ is in the present work used with reference to the text that has the function of the prologus praeter rem. The material is so rich and diverse that in this commentary only some of the important elements of the genre in antiquity and early medieval times can be listed here: These elements include: (a) Prayer. The prayer that the author may receive divine assistance in his composition of the work is frequent both in Pagan and Christian texts. According to Boethius, the invocation of God was obligatory in every prooemium.271 (b) Address of the dedicatee. The work may be dedicated to 267 See Willard

o

BOE
Dahl 2000d: 236. 268 The evidence of the Syriac version should be noted: According to von Dobschütz

o


UIF
‘Chronicle’ is placed immediately after the ‘Life of Paul’ in the Peshitta manuscript L (dated 768 AD). The ‘Chronicle’ here has a title meaning ‘Summary’, and is followed by an excerpt from the second book of Eusebius’ History of the Church. The ‘Epitome of the Pauline letters’, which in the Greek manuscripts usually is placed between the ‘Life’ and the ‘Chronicle’, here appears later. This sequence seems more reasonable than the make-up of this prologue in the majority of Greek Euthalian manuscripts. von Dobschütz thinks, however, that the manuscript L here reflects a secondary rearrangement of the Euthalian apparatus. On the theories of von Dobschütz, see also Willard

o
o 269 For the different variants, see von Dobschütz

o 270 See Harris 1893: 82 and above on the history of research. 271 Boethius (Consolation of Philosophy 3, 9): Invocandum, inquam, rerum omnium patrem, quo praetermisso nullum rite fundatur exordium. ‘We must call upon God for this, too, I said, for if this is omitted, there

198

Commentary

a person of high status.272 The dedication has often been linked to the publication of the work. The ‘sending’ of the work to the dedicatee may imply that the work now is put into circulation.273 (c) Confession of the author’s inability. This is frequently encountered in Christian texts.274 It may be considered a part of the ‘modesty topos’, which is found also in Jewish Wisdom literature and apocalypses.275 This motive may be associated with the prayer of the author for understanding.276 3.2.3.2. Comments on the ‘Prooemium’ Admiring your zealous love of learning (τὸ φιλομαθές), most honored father, I have obeyed your authority and your persuasive powers, and set out through a certain narrow strait and passage, that of scholarship, to write this prologue about the deeds (πραγματεία) of Paul.

The description of the unnamed father uses the word φιλομαθές. This word belonged since Hellenistic times to the conventional language of dedications.277 The father is thus cannot even be a first step that is proper and correct.’ (Tr. D. Slavitt). The words of Boethius are quoted in Brinkmann 1964: 4. In pagan literature, the model may be found in the invocation of the Muse in the opening lines of the Homeric poems. In Christian literature, the prayer may be replaced by a request for intercession. This is found in the prooemium that Rufinus prefixed to his translation of Origen’s Commentary on Romans: Aggrediar tamen, si forte orationibus tuis, quae mihi tamquam homini impossibilia videntur, aspirante Domino possibilia fiant. ‘Nevertheless I shall set out in the hope that by your prayers the things which seem to me to be humanly impossible might be possible as God assists me.’ (Tr. Th. P. Scheck) 272 Such as the dedication of Pollux’ Onomasticon to Commodus (see above). 273 This function has often been assigned to the dedicatee of Luke-Acts, Theophilus. See L. T. Johnson 1991: 29; Jervell 1998: 109. The prologue of Luke has been studied in the context of prologues from Hellenistic and early Imperial times by L. Alexander (1993). 274 See Brinkmann 1964: 5. His examples are mostly drawn from medieval literature written in the vernacular. The phenomenon he describes is, however, widespread. Hellholm indicated to me its presence in a number of authors, including the Shepherd of Hermas, Tertullian and Cyrillus of Jerusalem. For the Shepherd, see e.g., Sim V, 4,2; 7*
 o
IX, 3,6; 14,4, and also the introductory paragraph to the Mandates (= Vis V, 4): ὅλος συνεκόπην ἀπὸ τῆς λύπης, ὅτι οὕτως αὐτῷ ἀπεκρίθην πονηρῶς καὶ ἀφρόνως. ‘I was utterly overcome with sadness because I had spoken so wickedly and foolishly to him.’ Similarly, Tertullian (De baptismo, 10, 1), says diximus, quantum mediocritati nostrae licuit […] ‘We have spoken so much as our mediocrity allowed us […] Cf. also Cyrillus of Jerusalem (Myst. Cat. 2, 8): κατέχετε διὰ τῆς μνήμης, ἵνα κἀγὼ ἀνάξιος ἐπὶ ὑμῶν λέγω· ἀγαπῶ ὑμᾶς ὅτι πάντοτέ μου μέμνησθε […]. ‘Keep it in mind so that also I, the unworthy, may say of you: I love you, because you always remember me […]’ Examples are also found in historians that are presumably close to the time of Euthalius, see e.g., the historian Menander writing in the 6th cent. AD (L. Dindorfius, Historici Graeci minores II, 2): Οὐ τοσοῦτον τῷ τῆς λέξεως εὐγενεῖ ὅσον τῇ τῶν πραγμάτων ἀφηγήσει καρποῦσθαι θαρρήσας· πῶς γὰρ οἷόν τε ἦν ἐμὲ ἐς τοσοῦτον ἀφῖχθαι παιδείας ὡς καὶ ἐς τὸ συγγράφειν ἰέναι; ἀμέριμνος γὰρ ἐσότι ἔμοιγε ὁ βίος καὶ ἐκδεδιῃτημένος ὑπῆρχεν. ‘I build my hopes of success upon the interest of my subject rather than the distinction of my style; for I cannot conceivably have attained to that level of culture which would justify my embarking upon literary composition, considering the careless and irregular life which I have led hitherto.’ (Tr. A. Toynbee 1950: 94). See also the preface to the Universal History
PG
ćFPQIZMBDUVT
4JNPDBUUB
AUIF
TOVCOPTFE
DBU
oth cent AD): ‘If any reader should find here and there a touch of felicity in my narrative, he must attribute it to chance, for most certainly it will not be due to the competence of the writer.’ (Tr. Toynbee 1950: 100). 275 See K. B. Larsen

*O
IJT
TUVEZ
PO
UIF
ANPEFTUZ
UPQPT
JO
UIF
2VNSBO
UFYUT
IF
SFGFST
UP
84PM
o
%BO

BOE

&OPDI
o
276
4FF
FH
84PM
o
84JS
o 277 This is observed by Alexander (1993: 100): ‘The most striking feature of hellenistic dedication-courtesy is the popularity of adjectives and verbs compounded with philo- (especially, but not only, philomathes)

Commentary on the Prologues

199

described as the patron of the work.278 The author states that he has undertaken the work at the instigation of the father, which is also a conventional motive. It reflects the ‘modesty topos’ and counters a possible accusation for being arrogant or self-assertive.279 The work is compared to a sea voyage. The use of this metaphor may merely point to the difficulties in writing, but it may also have a special significance: According to Joseph Balogh, there is evidence that writers in antiquity used to read the text aloud as it was being written, like a self-dictation. Thus, to begin to write was literally to break the silence, and the finishing of the work could be compared to the return to a quiet harbor.280 This perspective may be applied to this prologue and the Euthalian prologue to the Catholic letters, where the image of the sea voyage again appears. The theme of the prologue is described as the ‘deeds’ (πραγματεία, Zacagni: gesta) of Paul. The prologue referred to may therefore not be identical with the expanded version found in the manuscripts. Since it does not mention the letters, the prologue may have contained the ‘Life of Paul’ only, and not the ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters.’ But come, offer your prayers for me, and, as though you were furnishing (πτερώσας) me with steering oars on both sides, stretch out your hands to God, just like the great Moses himself once extended his hands when he gave aid to Israel, drawn up for battle (ἐν τῇ παρεμβολῇ).

applied to patrons and readers.’ 278 The question of the identity of the father has been treated above, in the chapter on the history of research. The question (together with the question of authorship) is still one of the most difficult to answer. 279 See, e.g. the opening paragraph of the anonymous prologue to Acts edited by von Dobschütz (1898: o 
ГϨϣѴϫш϶
ϰϣ
ϡпϮ
ϰуϫ
ϣС϶
ϰч
ϣЯϟϡϡтϩϧϭϫ
ДϮϪϥϫϣцϟϫ
љϰϥϯϣ
ɀϟϮ҈
КϪҀϫ
и϶
ДϬѮ϶
ϡϣ
Ϩϟх
ɀϣϮх
ϰҀϫ
ἀποστολικῶν πράξεων δεησόμενος ἡμῶν·. ‘For he requested from us a commentary upon the gospel, intending, no doubt, later to ask also from us one upon the Acts of the Apostles.’ (Tr. von Dobschütz). Cf. also the letter of Jerome to Pope Damasus, where Jerome states that the Pope had forced him to make his translation of the Bible: Novum opus facere me cogis ex veteri 
A:PV
GPSDF
NF
UP
NBLF
B
OFX
XPSL
PO
the basis of the old.’ See the Epistula ad Damasum in J. Wordsworth and H. J. White 1889: 1. 280 J. Balogh

o
JMMVTUSBUFT
UIJT
XJUI
UIF
PQFOJOH
PG
UIF
Conlationes by Johannes Cassian: … mihi nunc in portu silentii constituto inmensum pelagus aperitur. ‘…now for me, who had anchored in the port of silence, an immense ocean opens up.’ Cassian returns to this image in the final sentence of the work, where he describes his return to the silent port now that the work is concluded. Balogh offers rich material to support his theory, including also the story of the healing of Zacharias (Luk 1:63) whose mouth was opened in the very moment he wrote the name on the tablet (this is how Balogh understands the construction ἔγραψεν λέγων). Thus, he links the image in Cassian with the ancient custom of self-dictation. Moreover, in some final remarks added to the study (p. 240), he considers the possibility that the medieval scribes had to ‘modernize’ the meaning of the image, since they usually no longer spoke the words when they were writing. He reproduces a distichon by Alcuin where he supposes that the image has undergone this revision: Hactenus in sanctum sulcando movimus aequor // Littoris ad finem nostra carina venit. Here, according to Balogh, the idea is no longer the return from garrulitas to silentium, but rather the arrival of the fatigued scribe to the longed-for shore when the painful work is ended. It is possible, however, to find an earlier example of the use of the same image. In the end of his Remedia amoris (WW
o


0WJE
TBZT
Hoc opus exegi: fessae date serta carinae // contigimus portus, quo mihi cursus erat. ‘I have brought this work to completion: Give garlands to the tired boat // We have reached the port that I was heading for.’ Ovid probably refers to the creative writing process, not its physical aspect. We may assume that the image has gone through several stages and also that the ancient examples could be reinterpreted. The return of the vessel to the silent port is also mentioned at the end of the Euthalian prooemium: ‘… I may bring for you the vessel of my work into a calm harbor.’ In view of the examples above, it is hard to say what significance this image has in the Euthalian prologue.

200

Commentary

The appeal for intercession is conventional (see above). The imagery used in this appeal includes the furnishing of the author’s vessel with steering oars. The verb πτερόω ‘to furnish a ship with oars’ (LSJ) is here used of the two steering oars of the ancient ship. Thus, the images of the prooemium are connected: The two steering oars, the extended hands of the praying father, and those of Moses. The allusion to Moses may be understood in different ways depending on how one translates ἐν τῇ παρεμβολῇ. Willard translates this phrase ‘in encampment’, apparently taking this as a reference to the encampment of Israel immediately before the passage of the Red sea (Ex 14).281 If this is assumed, the reference is to Moses dividing the sea for the Israelites. Against this, one may object that Moses in the Euthalian text is described as extending both his hands. This is the case only in the story of Israel’s battle against Amalek (&Y
o
-99 
)FSF
.PTFT
NJSBDVMPVTMZ
helped Israel win in this way.282 For this reason, παρεμβολή is here taken as referring to Israel as an army drawn up for battle.283 3.2.4. Prologus ante rem 3.2.4.1. The ‘Life of Paul’ 3.2.4.1.1. The Genre ‘Life’ A short biography of the author is often prefixed to the work.284 These texts may be considered a sub-genre of the Greco-Roman genre βίος/vita. What separates this sub-genre from the genre βίος/vita is how the texts are transmitted: The ‘life of the author’ is transmitted as auxiliary material together with his work. It therefore belongs, together with the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the ὑποθέσεις, to the genres that are intended to guide the reader, who supposedly will understand the work better if acquainted with the life of the author. The ‘Life’ may appear together with κεφάλαια-τίτλοι or ὑποθέσεις. This is the case in Porphyrius’ Περὶ τοῦ Πλωτίνου βίου καὶ τῆς τάξεως τῶν βιβλίων αὐτοῦ ‘About the Life of Plotin and the order of his books’, which was prefixed to Plotin’s Enneads. Here the ‘Life’ and lists of κεφάλαια-τίτλοι appear together, since the different parts of the work are assigned to different phases in Plotin’s life.285 281 See Willard 1970: 193/2009: 147. Cf. Ex 14:9 LXX, καὶ κατεδίωξαν οἱ Αἰγύπτιοι ὀπίσω αὐτῶν καὶ εὕροσαν αὐτοὺς παρεμβεβληκότας παρὰ τὴν θάλασσαν. ‘And the Egyptians pursued after them and found them having encamped by the sea.’ 282 Cf. Ex 17:11 LXX, καὶ ἐγίνετο ὅταν ἐπῆρεν Μωυσῆς τὰς χεῖρας, κατίσχυεν Ἰσραηλ. ‘And it came to pass, when Moses held up his hands, that Israel prevailed.’ The Masoretic text has the singular ‘hand’. Which battle Zacagni (PG 85: 694A) had in mind when he translated ἐν τῇ παρεμβολῇ as in pugnae discrimine (‘in the decisive moment of the battle’), is difficult to say, but it would probably be a better description of the battle against Amalek than the escape from the Egyptians. 283 On this meaning of the word, see Bauer s. v. παρεμβολή. 284 For the Lives of the Greek poets, see M. R. Lefkowitz

o


XIFSF
UIF
-JWFT
PG
)PNFS
1JOEBS
the tragedians and Artistophanes are printed in translation. For Lives of Homer, see also the edition of M. L. West 2003. The rich tradition of Lives of Virgil is found in J. Götte/M. Götte/K. Bayer 1981. The text of the Life of Terence may be found in P. Wessner’s edition of %POBUVT
*
o  285 See the Life of Plotin in the P. Henry and H.-R. Schwyzer’s edition of Plotin’s Enneads. On the work of Porphyrius as an editor, see A. Grafton and M. Williams

o
ćF
KVYUBQPTJUJPO
PG
AMJGF
BOE
‘work’ is common. A striking illustration, in miniature form, is the epitaph of Virgil: Mantua me genuit, Calabri rapuerunt tenet nunc // Parthenope cecini pascua, rura, duces. ‘Mantua bore me, Calabria snatched

Commentary on the Prologues

201

The sub-genre as far as the Greek poets are concerned has been studied by Mary Lefkowitz, who has shown that the lives of the Greek poets to a large extent were based on a ‘biographical’ reading of their works: Fictional elements in the works may be presented as reflecting events in the life of the author. This method could be supplemented by using other traditions, especially anecdotes drawn from comedy where authors such as Euripides were objects of derision.286 Their value as sources for the life of the authors is therefore questionable, to say the least. One of the main points of Lefkowitz is that these lives have nevertheless exerted a great influence on classical scholarship up to the present day.287 The practice of prefixing a biography of the author to the work is also known from the Early Church. A series of short lives of the evangelists were ascribed to Dorotheus, and occurs in manuscripts of the gospels.288 For his Life of Mark, von Soden gives the following text: Life of Mark (Text: von Soden 1902: 307)

My translation

Βίος Μάρκου ἐκ τῆς τοῦ Δωροθέου μάρτυρος καὶ Τυρίων ἐπισκόπου συνόψεως Μᾶρκος ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς καὶ πρῶτος Ἀλεξανδρείας ἐπίσκοπος Ἀλεξανδρεῦσι καὶ πάσῃ τῇ περιχώρῳ αὐτῆς ἐκήρυξε τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ κυρίου ἀπὸ Αἰγύπτου καὶ μέχρι Πενταπόλεως. ἐπὶ δὲ τῆς βασιλείας Τραιάνου, ἐν Ἀλεξανδρείᾳ κάλων λαβὼν ἐπὶ τοῦ τραχήλου καὶ συρεὶς ἀπὸ τῶν καλουμένων Ἀγγέλων ἐκεῖ ἐκάη πυρὶ ὑπὸ τῶν εἰδωλομανῶν μὴν Φαρμουθηλεως καὶ ἐκεῖ ἐτάφη ἐν τοῖς Βουκόλου.

Life of Mark from the Synopsis of the martyr Dorotheos bishop of Tyre. Mark the evangelist and first bishop of Alexandria preached the gospel of the Lord to the people of Alexandria and the whole surrounding area, from Egypt to Pentapolis. In Alexandria, under the reign of Trajan, a rope was bound around his neck and he was dragged from the place called Boukolou to the place called Angelion. There, in the month of Pharmouthi, he was burned in the fire by the frenzied idol-worshippers, and he was buried there, in Boukolou.

This Life of Mark does not refer to the text of the Gospel at all. But in other instances one may observe that the biblical writings were used as sources and supplemented with traditions of unknown provenance.289 Regarding the structure of the Lives, one may observe a difference between pagan and Christian texts. In the Lives of pagan authors, the birth and death of the author naturally formed the frame of the narrative.290 But in the Lives of me away, now Parthenope keeps me. My song was of pastures, of the countryside, and of princes.’ (Text with commentary in E. Courtney 2003: 258). For a similar phenomenon in patristic literature, see Theodoret (Preface, PG

o 
)FSF
UIF
MFUUFST
PG
1BVM
BSF
BMM
QMBDFE
XJUIJO
B
SFMBUJWF
DISPOPMPHZ
ćF
UFYU
is, however, not a biography of Paul in a strict sense, since the main focus is the occasion of each letter. 286 See Lefkowitz

WJJJoJY 287 Thus, Lefkowitz (1981: x) suggests that the image of the pious Sophocles or the innovative Euripides largely rests on the picture painted of these authors and their works in the Lives. 288 The Lives of the evangelists were reproduced by Erasmus in his first edition of the Greek and Latin NT (1516). 289 E.g. in the use of the Gospel of John, Acts and extra-canonical sources in the ‘Life of John’ ascribed to Sophronius (Text in von Soden

o 
Κϵрϫϫϥ϶
Ьϫ
ΚϥϯϭѼ϶
ɀϟϫϱϥϡрɀϥϯϣϫ
ϱТч϶
͇ϣϠϣϢϟцϭϱ
ἀδελφὸς Ἰακώβου τοῦ ὑπὸ Ἡρώδου μετὰ τὸ πάθος τοῦ κυρίου ἀποκεφαλισθέντος, ἔσχατος πάντων ἔγραψεν εὐαγγέλιον. ‘John, whom Jesus loved in particular, son of Zebedee, brother of James who was beheaded by Herod after the Passion of the Lord, wrote the Gospel as the last of them all.’ 290 See the Lives of Homer, Pindar, Aeschylus, Sophocles and Aristophanes in Lefkowitz

o

202

Commentary

the biblical authors this frame is not always present.291 Some of the biblical authors had, according to tradition, suffered martyrdom. Since this event was considered the most important in their lives, the texts tend to focus on this. This focus sometimes makes the heading ‘Life’ in the biblical manuscript seem rather paradoxical, as in the ‘Life of Mark’ above, where the heading ‘Martyrdom’ would be possible. The information on the life of Mark seems here to be only the pre-history to his martyrdom. 3.2.4.1.2. Structure and Pre-texts According to von Soden, the ‘Life of Paul’ can be divided into six sub-sections. These divisions are adopted in the present study in a modified form, as the note on the celebration of Paul’s martyrdom is treated as an independent section. There are no titles for these sub-sections in the original. The pre-texts of the different sub-sections may be identified thus (see the comments below for details). (1) The background of Paul (pre-texts: Acts and the Letters) (2) Saul the persecutor (pre-texts: Acts and the Letters) (3) Paul’s conversion (pre-text: Acts) (4) The beginnings of his work (an independent piece which introduces Paul as a writer of letters) (5) His great missionary travels among the Gentiles (pre-texts: Gal, Rom) (6) The death of Paul (pre-texts: Acts, extra-biblical sources) (7) The celebration of his martyrdom. (pre-texts: extra-biblical sources) 3.2.4.1.3. Comments on the ‘Life of Paul’ [The background of Paul] Paul the Apostle was a Hebrew by race (2 Cor 11:22; Phil 3:5), of the tribe of Benjamin (Acts 13:21; Rom 11:1), belonging to the party of the Pharisees (Acts 23:6; 26:5, Phil 3:6), educated in the Law of Moses by Gamaliel (Acts 5:34; 22:3), the faithful (πιστός) teacher.

The opening that gives the name and nation of the man is the conventional opening of a biography.292 The description of Gamaliel as διδάσκαλος πιστός replaces νομοδιδάσκαλος τίμιος in the pre-text (Acts 5:34). The epithet πιστός ‘faithful’ may be used of him because his intervention saved Peter and John from being executed ("DUT
o 
"OPUIFS
QPTsibility is that the word here has the meaning ‘trustworthy’ and refers to εἰ δὲ ἐκ θεοῦ ἐστίν, οὐ δυνήσεσθε καταλῦσαι αὐτούς (Acts 5:39) as a prediction spoken by Gamaliel that was fulfilled with the spread of Christianity. 291 Only the reference to Luke as an Antiochene occurs frequently. The shortest form of the ‘Life of Luke’ (Text in von Soden 1902: 305) has this tradition in a confused form, saying that Antioch was where he died: Λουκᾶς ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς ὁ καὶ τὰς πράξεις τῶν ἀποστόλων συγγράψας εἷς ἐστι τῶν μαθητῶν, ἐκοιμήθη ἐν Αντιοχίᾳ. ‘Luke the evangelist who also wrote the Acts of the Apostles was one of the disciples. He died in Antioch.’ 292 See, e.g., the opening of the ‘Life of Hannibal’ by Nepos (Text in P. K. Marshall 1977: 80): Hannibal, Hamilcaris filius, Carthaginiensis. ‘Hannibal, son of Hamilcar, a Carthaginian.’

Commentary on the Prologues

203

For this very reason, he was present at the slaughter of Stephen, the apostle and the martyr, and he was also then taking part in the killing, as he received the mantles of all those who stoned him, to watch over them so that he could use the hands of all to kill. Pre-text (Acts 7:58b): καὶ οἱ μάρτυρες ἀπέθεντο τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτῶν παρὰ τοὺς πόδας νεανίου καλουμένου Σαύλου Pre-text (Acts 22:20): καὶ ὅτε ἐξεχύννετο τὸ αἷμα Στεφάνου τοῦ μάρτυρός σου, καὶ αὐτὸς ἤμην ἐφεστὼς καὶ συνευδοκῶν καὶ φυλάσσων τὰ ἱμάτια τῶν ἀναιρούντων αὐτόν The ‘Life’ combines elements from the story told in "DUT
o
BOE
UIF
TVNNBSZ
PG
the same story in the speech of Paul in Jerusalem (Acts 22:20). In "DUT
o
UIF
motif that Paul watched over the mantles is absent but it is found in 22:20. Another element from 22:20 is the title ‘martyr’ applied to Stephen, which in Acts 7:58 is used in a completely different sense, being applied to the witnesses that take part in the execution. But the ‘Life’ has also added elements that are not in the pre-text: (1) The idea that those who stoned Stephen were only agents of Paul has been added to the text.293 (2) Also the description of Stephen as an ‘apostle’ is an innovation with regard to Acts. [Saul the persecutor] And he left nothing behind in excessive fury (οὐδὲν εἰς ὑπερβολὴν μανίας ἐνέλιπεν, cf. Acts 26:11), because in this he believed (ἐνόμιζεν) he was acting piously (εὐσεβεῖν) and that he was setting the greatest things right, as both he himself confesses in his letters, and as Luke tells us in his second book.

The references to the Pauline letters and to Acts cannot be identified with certainty. As to the letters, the ‘Life’ may refer to Phil 3:6 κατὰ ζῆλος διώκων τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, κατὰ τὴν ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοσύνην γενόμενος ἄμεμπτος. The reference to Acts is probably Acts 26:9 ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν ἔδοξα ἐμαυτῷ πρὸς τὸ ὄνομα Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Ναζωραίου δεῖν πολλὰ ἐναντία πρᾶξαι. If this is the case, the word ἐνόμιζεν reflects ἔδοξα ἐμαυτῷ (26:9) and the idea of ‘acting piously’ reflects δεῖν (26:9), emphasizing the element of obligation in piety. [Paul’s conversion] And when Paul at that time had received letters from the priests and the teachers to the Jews in Damascus, he set out, roaring like a violent river (χείμαῤῥος λάβρος), thinking he would dash against the disciples in Damascus from all sides and send them into the pit of perdition. Pre-text ("DUT
o
DG
22:5; o 
γ
Ϣс
͓ϟѼϩϭ϶
Зϰϧ
ГϪɀϫтϵϫ
ЋɀϣϧϩѮ϶
Ϩϟх
ϲшϫϭϱ
εἰς τοὺς μαθητὰς τοῦ κυρίου, προσελθὼν τῷ ἀρχιερεῖ ᾐτήσατο παρ’ αὐτοῦ ἐπιστολὰς εἰς Δαμασκὸν πρὸς τὰς συναγωγάς, ὅπως ἐάν τινας εὕρῃ τῆς ὁδοῦ ὄντας, ἄνδρας τε καὶ γυναῖκας, δεδεμένους ἀγάγῃ εἰς Ἰερουσαλήμ The ‘Life’ has apparently used "DUT
o
BT
B
NPEFM
CVU
BEEFE
FMFNFOUT
GSPN
UIF
QBSBMMFM
passages Acts 22:5 and 26:12.294 Unlike Acts, the ‘Life’ uses the name ‘Paul’ throughout 293 This was observed by Dahl (2000d: 235). There is here a difficulty in the narrative of Acts. In Acts, Paul advances from an apparently insignificant position to the most powerful persecutor within a few days. On this problem, see Haenchen 1956: 245 and Pervo 2009: 200. By giving Paul the responsibility for the killing of Stephen, the Life has eliminated this difficulty. 294 That Paul brought the Christians to be executed is not said explicitly in 9:1 but in 22:4, ἐδίωξα ἄχρι θανάτου and 26:10, ἀναιρουμένων τε αὐτῶν κατήνεγκα ψῆφον.

204

Commentary

the text.295 The imagery resembles the description in Rev 12 where a river296 comes out of the mouth of the dragon threatening the woman who has fled into the desert with her child (Rev 12:15). The context in Rev 12 is also that of persecution and according to some ancient interpreters, the woman represents the Church.297 This corresponds to the figure of Rhode in the Shepherd of Hermas (Vis I 1,6).298 Thus, the image of the ‘Life’ is traditional but its use here makes Saul seem even more fierce than in the accounts in Acts. His aim is not simply to take prisoners (as in the narrative of Acts) but to send the disciples into the pit of perdition, which is also a piece of apocalyptic imagery. He confessed (ὁμολογεῖ) his faith in Christ

Since Paul according to the ‘Life’ immediately becomes a follower of Jesus,299 the verb ὁμολογεῖ here probably refers to Paul’s address of Jesus as κύριε in the dialogue that takes place within the vision: τί ποιήσω, κύριε; (Acts 22:10).300 The text of Acts does not mention Paul’s confession in the context of his baptism.301 [The beginnings of his work] Thus he transformed his zeal into the utmost piety, strengthening (βεβαιόω) the pious disciples (τοὺς τῆς εὐσεβείας μαθητάς) with letters if he sometimes happened to be absent, in order that they for the future might acquire the teaching (διδασκαλία) not only through his deeds, but also through his words, and, being strengthened by both, they might carry an unshakeable stronghold of piety (ἄσειστον τῆς εὐσεβείας ἔρυμα) within their souls.

The introduction of Paul’s letters is an isolated piece within the ‘Life’. No attempt is made to relate the letters to different periods in Paul’s life. This aspect of Paul’s work is treated in very general terms. The verbal meta-term used for the letter writing is βεβαιόω ‘to strengthen’ and the nominal meta-term διδασκαλία ‘teaching’. It is puzzling that there is no mention here of the ‘Epitome’ which soon will follow. A possible explanation is that the ‘Life’ and the ‘Epitome’ are independent compositions and that the fusion of the two represents a later stage.302

295 With the exception of a short passage on the change of name from Saul to Paul. This is included in the present translation. Willard (1970: 18, n. 2/2009: 14, n. 17) considers the passage a later addition. 296 In his translation of the Euthalian prologue, Willard (1970: 195/2009: 148) omits the word χείμαρρος: ‘Paul rushed on, roaring, as if some stormy, turbulent thing…’ 297 See Andreas of Caesarea, the 35th κεφάλαιον-τίτλος of the Apocalypse (text in von Soden 1902: 474): ὅπως ὁ δράκων διώκων τὴν ἐκκλησίαν οὐ παύεται. ‘How the dragon did not cease to persecute the Church’. 298 On this image representing the Church in the Shepherd, see Hellholm 2007: 289; idem 2010: 222. 299 Ἱκέτης γὰρ εὐθὺς ὁ πολέμιος γίνεται. ‘The enemy became straightaway a follower of Jesus’. 300 Willard (1970: 195/2009: 148) points out that the ‘Life’ also offers a remarkable rationalization of the stimulus for Paul’s conversion: God exempts Paul from further punishment because he has improved, an idea that is not found in Acts. Willard’s interpretation seems to presuppose that Paul’s conversion according to the ‘Life’ did not take place on the road to Damascus, but shortly afterwards. 301
$G
"DUT
o
XIFSF
UIF
DPOGFTTJPO
UIBU
QSFDFEFT
UIF
CBQUJTN

JT
B
MBUFS
BEEJUJPO
UP
UIF
UFYU
4FF
Metzger

o 302 Elements from the ‘Epitome’ are in fact transmitted independently, in Latin manuscripts from Monte Cassino. On these manuscripts, see Harnack

o
BOE

BCPWF
*U
TIPVME
BMTP
CF
OPUFE
UIBU
the ‘Epitome’ may have been transmitted detached from the Euthalian Prologue to the Letters of Paul in the Syriac manuscript L (Dated 768 AD), see von Dobschütz 1899: 125.

Commentary on the Prologues

205

One of the key words in the passage is εὐσέβεια ‘piety’: The disciples are described as οι της ευσεβειας μαθηται, and the letters of Paul will create an ἄσειστον τῆς εὐσεβείας ἔρυμα in the readers. According to von Dobschütz, the word εὐσέβεια can in many instances only be accurately rendered by ‘Christianity’.303 [His great missionary travels among the Gentiles] After some time (μετὰ χρόνον τινά), Paul again went up to Jerusalem, to see Peter. Then they also divided the whole world between them, and after Paul received the part of the Gentiles, as it befell Peter to teach the Jewish people, he traversed many cities and many lands and he almost filled (ἐνέπλησε) all of Illyricum with the teachings of faith in Christ. Pre-text (Gal 2:1): Ἔπειτα διὰ δεκατεσσάρων ἐτῶν πάλιν ἀνέβην εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα μετὰ Βαρναβᾶ συμπαραλαβὼν καὶ Τίτον Pre-text ((BM
o 
Ћϩϩп
ϰϭЯϫϟϫϰцϭϫ
СϢшϫϰϣ϶
Юϰϧ
ɀϣɀцϯϰϣϱϪϟϧ
ϰч
ϣЯϟϡϡтϩϧϭϫ
ϰѮ϶
ἀκροβυστίας καθὼς Πέτρος τῆς περιτομῆς, ὁ γὰρ ἐνεργήσας Πέτρῳ εἰς ἀποστολὴν τῆς περιτομῆς ἐνήργησεν καὶ ἐμοὶ εἰς τὰ ἔθνη Pre-text (Rom 15:19b): ὥστε με ἀπὸ Ἰερουσαλὴμ καὶ κύκλῳ μέχρι τοῦ Ἰλλυρικοῦ πεπληρωκέναι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ Χριστοῦ The ‘Life’ differs from the pre-text in Gal with regard to chronology. The reference to the lapse of fourteen years (Gal 2:1) is omitted, and Paul visits Jerusalem ‘after some time’. Only one visit to Jerusalem before Paul’s final journey is referred to in the ‘Life’ (omitting (BM
o 
ćF
NFFUJOH
JT
EFTDSJCFE
JO
UIF
A-JGF as between Paul and Peter only, there is no interest in Paul’s co-workers or in the other leaders of the Church in Jerusalem (see Gal 2:9).304 The motivation for the meeting is according to the ‘Life’ ‘to see Peter’. This would be a possible paraphrase of Gal 1:18 ἱστορῆσαι Κεφᾶν, which Paul in Gal gives as the reason for his previous visit. In Gal, Paul says that he went to the second meeting with Peter κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν (2:2), a motive that is omitted from the ‘Life’. The description 303 This suggestion is made by von Dobschütz

o
DPNNFOUJOH
PO
BO
BOPOZNPVT
QSPMPHVF
to Acts. This prologue, he conjectured, belonged to the lost commentary on that book by Theodore of Mopsuestia. The prologue contains formulas like τὴν εὐσέβειαν διδάσκειν, κηρύττειν, παραδιδόναι, and ὑποδέχεσθαι. von Dobschütz suggests the translation ‘Christianity’ in these instances. But he also draws attention to the close association between εὐσέβεια and παίδευσις found in this author: ‘The εὐσέβεια is for him a schooling (παίδευσις) of mankind’ (p. 383). The reference is to the following passage: μετ᾽ ἐκεῖνο δὲ ἀποῤῥήτοις οἰκονομίαις ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιποὺς ἀνθρώπους τῆς εὐσεβείας τὴν παίδευσιν ἐκβαλὼν πολλοῖς τισι καὶ ποικίλοις ἄγαν τοῖς τρόποις. ‘And [God] having after this with mysterious dispensations sent forth VQPO
UIF
SFTU
PG
NFO
UIF
JOTUSVDUJPO
JO
QJFUZ
JO
NBOZ
BOE
WFSZ
WBSJPVT
XBZT
5FYU
PO
Q
o
USBOTMBtion by von Dobschütz on p. 364). 304 The lack of care in the paraphrase of the pre-text indicates that the Prologue to the Letters of Paul is not interested in historical details. With respect to this, the prologue may be compared to Priscillian, who gives a strange turn to this story: Quia gentium sit apostolus quibus et euangelium praedicat, et quod veniens Antiochiam reprehendit Petrum sibique dextras dederint Iacobus et Iohannes et Barnabae societatis (Can. LXXV, Schepss 1889: 140). ‘That he is the Apostle of the Gentiles, to whom he also preaches the Gospel, and that coming to Antioch he rebuked Peter, and James and John gave the right hands of fellowship to himself and Barnabas.’ Apparently, the Apostolic Council is assigned to Antioch, and Peter is not even included in the agreement. A very different approach may be found in the ὑποθέσεις of Theodoret. Instead of the dangerous method of paraphrasing, Theodoret prefers to quote the biblical texts in order to demonstrate his main points. Thus, in his ὑπόθεσις of Ephesians (PG

o


IF
HJWFT
B
NPSF
BDDVSBUF
account of the Apostolic Council, see Appendix.

206

Commentary

in the ‘Life’ of the extension of Paul’s mission is apparently based on Rom 15:19. In the pre-text, Paul describes Illyricum as the extreme border of his missionary activity so far. This has been transformed in the ‘Life’, where Paul has almost filled the whole of Illyricum with his teaching of faith. This change may reflect the actual spread of Christianity at the time the ‘Life’ was composed.305 [The death of Paul] So there the blessed Paul, having fought the good fight, as he says himself, received the crown (στέφανος) of the holy and victorious martyrs of Christ.

The crown of the martyrs that Paul receives may allude to the martyrdom of Stephen, although this is not explicitly said.306 Possibly, this motive is present also in the text of Acts. [The celebration of his martyrdom] The Romans, having enclosed his remains in the most beautiful kingly buildings, attend a festival to his memory once a year, on the third day before the calends of July, on the fifth day of the month Panemos, celebrating his martyrdom.

The last section notes the celebration of Paul’s martyrdom on the 29th of June. The date is referred to both as the third day before the calends of July and as the fifth day of the month Panemos.307 The 29th of June is actually the day of Peter and Paul, but the ‘Life’ mentions only Paul.308 3.2.4.2. The ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters’ 3.2.4.2.1. The Genre ‘Epitome’ The genre ‘Epitome’ is classified by Raible as a form of reduction, i.e. a genre that represents an abbreviated form of another work. It is thus related to the ὑπόθεσις.309 A difference between the epitome and the ὑπόθεσις is the extent of the pre-texts. The genre ὑπόθεσις represents a specific work or text-sequence. An epitome may have the total literary output of an author or an entire philosophical system as its ‘pre-text’.310 According to Ilona Opelt, the genre ‘Epitome’ was primarily associated with history and scientific literature in general. Its use in later times includes also the mythology, paroemiography

305 This was suggested to me by David Hellholm. 306 Cf. Eusebius (H. E. ii, 1) on the death of Stephen: καὶ ταύτῃ πρῶτος τὸν αὐτῷ φερώνυμον τῶν ἀξιονίκων τοῦ Χριστοῦ μαρτύρων ἀποφέρεται στέφανον. ‘Thus he was the first to win the crown called by the same name as he, and reserved for Christ’s worthily victorious martyrs. (Tr. Williamson/Louth) 307 Robinson

o
EJTDVTTFT
UIF
UFYUVBM
QSPCMFNT
JO
UIF
USBOTNJTTJPO
PG
UIF
EBUF
ćF
SFGFSFODF
UP
the fifth of Panemos is omitted in some manuscripts, and a reference to the sixth of Lous takes its place. There are also manuscripts where both Panemos and Lous are found in a corrupt form. According to Robinson, the reference to Lous points to Asia Minor, but he admits that the textual tradition is so confused that it is difficult to draw any conclusion regarding the origin of the apparatus. 308 See Dahl 2000: 237. 309 See Raible

o 310 Thus Raible (1995: 58) draws attention to the importance of the genre ‘Epitome’ among the Epicureans and the Stoics. An example of this kind of ‘philosophical epitome’ is the Kyriai doxai of Epicurus, which Betz

o
DPOTJEFST
B
QBSBMMFM
UP
UIF
4FSNPO
PO
UIF
.PVOU


Commentary on the Prologues

207

and poetry.311 The designation ‘epitome’ is used with reference to this text in the following Editorial Notice: Καὶ τὰ μὲν κατ᾽ ἐπιτομὴν παρ᾽ ἡμῶν εἰρήσθω περὶ αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τοσοῦτον ‘so far, let this be said about them as described in our epitome’. 3.2.4.2.2. Structure The ‘Epitome’ may be divided into three main parts: (1) Introduction, (2) The Letters of Paul, and (3) Conclusion. The second part is divided into two sub-sections: (a) On the letters that Paul wrote to the churches, and (b) on the letters he wrote to individuals. This division is expressed by the following transitory and meta-textual formula: ‘Up to this point, the letters deal with the progress that is characteristic of each community’ (see below). 3.2.4.2.3. Comments 3.2.4.2.3.1. [Introduction] Before this, the blessed one had already written (ἐποιήσατο) many exhortations on both life and virtue (πολλὰς παραινέσεις ὑπέρ τε βίου καὶ ἀρετῆς), and Paul the Apostle had explained (εἰσηγήσατο) much regarding what people ought to do (πολλὰ περὶ τῶν πρακτέων τοῖς ἀνθρώποις). And not only that, but throughout the text of the fourteen letters he described all patterns of proper social conduct (τὴν ὅλην ἀνθρώποις διέγραψε πολιτείαν).

The writing of the Pauline letters is characterized with two meta-communicative expressions: ἐποιήσατο and εἰσηγήσατο. The objects of these verbs refer both to moral exhortation. The hendiadys puts great emphasis on this aspect of the Pauline letters, they are described as παραινέσεις, and it is noteworthy that the Christian character of the letters is not even mentioned: The παραινέσεις are ‘on life and virtue’ not on ‘life in Christ’. Thus, the Pauline letters are in this Introduction presented as a handbook in ethics. That the letters in fact are far more than exhortations, but also contain teaching on doctrine and also polemic against heresy, is not the center of interest in the following ‘Epitome’. 3.2.4.2.3.2. [Paul’s Letters to the Churches] An important idea of the ‘Epitome’ is that the letters to the churches are ordered according to the spiritual progress (αὔξησις, προσαύξησις) of the addressees. This idea may be unique to the ‘Epitome’. It may be understood against the background of the pre-texts: The idea of progress is often found in the thanksgiving sections of the Pauline letters, where Paul praises the progress of the different communities (e.g. Phil 1:9; Col 1:6). The innovation of the ‘Epitome’ is to make this idea the organizing principle of the collection of community letters. From the perspective of the reader, the idea of progress turns the book of Pauline letters into a manual, with lessons of increasing difficulty. It is not said that there is a continued progress from each community to the next. This would be difficult to demonstrate, as the letter to the Galatians is placed as the fourth, and the Galatians had, according 311 See I. Opelt

o
XJUI
B
MJTU
PG
FQJUPNFT
GSPN
WBSJPVT
HFOSFT
PG
(SFDP3PNBO
MJUFSBUVSF
DPMT
o
BOE
GSPN
UIF
$ISJTUJBO
QFSJPE
DPMT
o 
ćF
FQJUPNFT
GSPN
UIF
$ISJTUJBO
QFSJPE
JODMVEF
epitomes of works such as the pseudo-Clementine Recognitiones and Homiliae, the Panarion of Ephiphanius and the Conlationes of Johannes Cassian.

208

Commentary

to the ‘Epitome’, defected to Judaism. The explanation may be that the letters constitute different groups. Although not explicitly stated, the ‘Epitome’ seems to divide the letters to the communities into three such groups, each representing a stage of development.312 First group: Letters to churches that have not yet proven themselves worthy

Second group: Letters to the faithful churches

Third group: Letters to the persecuted churches

Romans: Their devotion was Ephesians: Faithful and en- Thessalonians: Endured pernew. during. secution. Corinthians: Their behavior Philippians: Faithful and fruit was not worthy of faith. bearing. Galatians: Defected to Juda- Colossians: Faithful and stead- Hebrews: Endured persecuism. fast. Ordered not to pay atten- tion. Received a letter on Jewtion to Jewish observances. ish mysteries and the translation of these to Christ.

The members of the first group do not have any positive qualities. The Corinthians have failed morally, while the Galatians have erred through their defection to Judaism. It may be significant that the ‘Epitome’ has nothing special to say about the faith of the church in Rome, while the pre-text offered a praise of the community (Rom 1:8). We could expect an echo of this praise in a summary of the letter, but this would of course destroy the idea of progress that is the main point of the ‘Epitome’. Possibly, the praise was suppressed for this reason. Moreover, one may suspect that this silence contains a hidden polemic against Rome. The depiction of the Romans as people whose devotion was ‘new’ at least does not grant any special status to the Roman church.313 The difficulty in dating the material does not allow us to go further with regard to this.314 The ‘Epitome’ does however point out that there is an affinity between Rom and Eph, but this affinity is related to the genre of the letters (see below). The members of the second group are all characterized as faithful (πιστός) together with another epithet that is specific for each community. Both the Philippians and the Colossians have virtues that the corresponding members of the first group do not have: The Philippians are fruit bearing in contrast to the Corinthians. The steadfast Colossians are contrasted to the defection of the Galatians. The members of the third group are churches that have suffered persecution (cf. 1 Thess 2:14; Heb o 

312 This was suggested to me by Nils A. Dahl. In his study of Euthalius, however, Dahl (2000d: 238) argued that the epitomizer saw a progress in the collection from each community to the next. Dahl saw that the sequence 1 Cor-2 Cor-Gal presented a problem. He tried to solve it by suggesting that the Galatians in the eyes of the epitomizer were above the Corinthians since the Galatians had a genuine faith before their defection. Against this explanation, it may be objected that the genuine faith of the Galatians is not mentioned in the ‘Epitome’ but only in the ὑπόθεσις of Gal. 313 Cf. also the omission of Peter in connection with the day of Peter and Paul (see above). 314 It is most interesting that the three members of this first group are the same as the communities that Paul, according to the so-called Marcionite prologues ‘calls back’ (revocat) to the true faith. This may simply be explained on the basis of the pre-texts, although the letter to the Romans does not exactly suggest this.

Commentary on the Prologues

209

Thus, the letter to the Romans contains a catechism of Christ (κατήχησις εἰς Χριστόν), in particular through an argument based on natural reasoning (διὰ τῆς ἐκ φυσικῶν λογισμῶν ἀποδείξεως). This is why it is placed first, as a letter written to people whose devotion was new.

The meta-term κατήχησις suggests that the letter contains elementary instruction and this is repeated in the summary of Eph below. This aspect is supposed to explain why Rom is placed first in the collection.315 Regarding the argument based on natural reasoning, one may assume that the ‘Epitome’ distinguishes this kind of argument from an argument based on Scripture. The brief summary does however not explain this further. Placed as fifth is the one to the Ephesians, who were faithful and enduring. In its exordium the mystery is described in a way similar to Romans. He knew both [communities] from what he had heard. These letters differ from others, as they are primary principles for catechumens (ἀρχαὶ κατηχουμένων) and introductions for believers (πιστῶν εἰσαγωγαί).

According to the ‘Epitome’, the mystery is explained in a similar way in the προγραφή of Eph and in Rom. The term προγραφή probably refers to the exordium of Eph.316 Another shared feature according to the ‘Epitome’, is that Paul had not met the recipients personally. The idea seems to be that Paul had explained the mystery himself to those he had met and taught. To the Romans and to the Ephesians, on the other hand, he had to explain it through a letter.317

315 The view of Romans as a letter with elementary instruction may be contrasted with the description by Origen in the Commentary on Romans (Praefatio): […] ceteris apostoli Pauli epistulis difficilior putatur ad intelligendum haec, quae ad Romanos scripta est. ‘The letter that was written to the Romans seems to be more difficult to understand than the other letters of Paul the Apostle.’ 316 The question of which texts the ‘Epitome’ refers to is difficult to answer. As far as Eph is concerned, Eph o
DG
o
TIPVME
CF
DPOTJEFSFE
ćFTF
UFYUT
NBZ
CF
DPOOFDUFE
UP
3PN
o
ćFTF
UFYUT
SFGFS
to the revelation of the mystery that now has been revealed, see Dahl

o
BOE
Hellholm 1998. Percy

o
BSHVFT
GPS
BO
BďOJUZ
CFUXFFO
3PN
o
BOE
&QI
PO
UIF
TUZMJTUJD
MFWFM
BOE
UIJT
may also be implied in the ‘Epitome’ by the word παραπλησίως ‘in a similar way’. 317 Cf. the remark by Pokorný on the significance on the mystery in Col and Eph (1992: 18): ‘Die Schule deren Lehre der Kolosser- und Epheserbriefe repräsentieren, hat den Paulinismus als Deutung des Geheimnisses begriffen.’ It is worth noting that the Prologue to the Letters of Paul does not spell out what the mystery is, as it is probably considered self-evident. As far as Eph (and possibly Col) is concerned, the mystery is the inclusion of Gentiles in the universal church through Christ, see J. B. Lightfoot (1892: 166) and Percy

o 
Sellin (2008: 101) points out that the exclusive use of the singular το μυστηριον in Paul reflects a view of the Christ-event as the definitive eschatological event. Thus, one may also say with Sellin (2008: 253) that the mystery is Christ ‘insofern er das Hauptinhalt des göttlichen Heilsplans ist.’ The identification of the mystery with Christ may also lead to a different emphasis, where the mystery is interpreted as a sacrament. The usual rendering of μυστήριον in the Vulgate is sacramentum, and for this reason the ambiguity of the Latin term is well known. In the parallel material treated in the present commentary, such a development may be observed in the summaries of Priscillian (Can. XLII): Quia corpus ac sanguinem Christi, quod est magnum pietatis sacramentum, manifestatum in carne, iustificatum in spiritu, si quis indigne sumpserit, corporis ipsius sanguinisque sit reus. ‘That the body and blood of Christ, which is the great mystery of faith, has been revealed in flesh and justified in the spirit, if someone takes it unworthily, he shall be guilty of his body and blood.’ This summary, which combines the idea of the revealed mystery with teaching on the sacrament has a clear basis in the pre-texts (1 Tim 3:16 and 1 Cor 11:27, see Schepss 1889: 128), but would appear misplaced if it were found in the Euthalian material: It is worth noting that there is no explicit reference to the Eucharist in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, and, as far as I can see, not in the entire Euthalian apparatus.

210

Commentary

This letter (i.e. Phil) differs from Corinthians, because to them he said: ‘Be followers of me’ (μιμηταί μου γίνεσθε, 1 Cor 11:1), but to the Philippians: ‘Be followers together with me’ (συμμιμηταί μου γίνεσθε, Phil 3:17). But he also calls them his crown and his joy. To such a degree do they differ from the Corinthians. According to the ‘Epitome’, the difference between the two exhortations is evidence of the more advanced progress of the Philippians. Thus, the ‘Epitome’ apparently understands συμμιμηταί as follows: The Philippians are companions of Paul in imitating Christ. This places the Philippians above the Corinthians who are merely imitators of Paul.318 Placed after these is the letter to the Hebrews, whose followers were the aforementioned. This contains treatment of Jewish mysteries and the translation of these as pertaining to Christ, which was announced beforehand by the prophets.

The words on Heb is the most interesting part of the Epitome. Judaism has been treated also within the earlier groups. The Galatians had defected to Judaism, while the Colossians were threatened by a heresy that implied adherence to Jewish observances. Now, the theme appears for the third time and is given a far more positive treatment. Elements of the Jewish religion, presumably the cult in the temple and the objects that were used for this purpose, are respectfully referred to as ‘Jewish mysteries’. These mysteries have not been abandoned, but instead they have been transformed and given a new meaning. This positive statement differs strikingly from the depiction of Judaism in the ὑποθέσεις. Up to this point, the letters deal with the progress that is characteristic of each community. (Ἐνταῦθα περικλείουσι τὴν κατὰ τὸν λαὸν ἰδιωτικὴν αὔξησιν αἱ ἐπιστολαί).

It is clear that the meta-formula indicates a division between the two groups of letters, but the exact meaning of the formula is unclear. Willard translates ‘Thereupon the letters deal with the individual growth of the people’, thus taking the formula as referring to the following letters to individuals.319 Zacagni, on the other hand, considers it a reference to the previous letters and has the following interpretation: Et hic desinunt Pauli epistolae, juxta majorem minoremque profectum singularum gentium, ad quas scriptae sunt in hunc ordinem digestae.320 ‘At this point, the Letters of Paul cease to be ordered according to the greater or lesser progress of each community to which they were written’. The translation of the present work follows Zacagni in taking the sentence as a reference to the previous letters, since the phrase κατὰ τὸν λαόν seems to point to the communities, and not to individuals persons. 3.2.4.2.3.3. [Paul’s Letters to Individuals] [2 Tim] He orders him to come. Perhaps he might see him close to the end of his completion (πρὸς τὸ τέλος ὁρᾶν τῆς αὐτοῦ συμπληρώσεως), as he pointed out by saying: ‘I am already on the point of being sacrificed; the time of my departure has drawn near’ ( = 2 Tim 4:6). Pre-text (2 Tim 4:9): σπούδασον ἐλθεῖν πρός με ταχέως In the treatment of Paul’s letters to individuals, martyrdom is the central theme. This emphasis may explain why the ‘Epitome’ makes a clear division between these and the 318 This rare interpretation of Phil 3:17 is found also in W. Schenk (1984: 329). 319 See Willard

o
 320 Zacagni 1698: 526 = PG: 85: 106A.

Commentary on the Prologues

211

community letters. The ‘Epitome’ pays special attention to Paul’s martyrdom referring to it as τὸ τέλος τῆς αὐτοῦ συμπληρώσεως. It seems clear, however, that this ideal, at the time the ‘Epitome’ was composed, already belonged to the past. But he [i.e. Onesimus] became a martyr for the sake of Christ in the city of the Romans, when Tertullus was prefect. By the shattering of his legs he suffered the lot of martyrdom.

Also the summary of the letter to Philemon is connected to this theme, as the ‘Epitome’ mentions the martyrdom of Onesimus in Rome. Dahl observed that this piece also is found as an addition to the ὑπόθεσις of Philem in Zacagni’s edition but is absent from the same ὑπόθεσις in Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae.321 3.2.4.2.3.4. [Conclusion] Thus, the book (βίβλος) as a whole includes every aspect of proper social conduct (παντοῖον εἶδος πολιτειῶν) arranged according to progress.

The conclusion refers to the Pauline letters as a book. The ‘Epitome’ is not intended as an introduction to each letter, but rather to the entire work of Paul.322 It should be noted that precisely in the conclusion of the Epitome, we find that the paraenetic aspect again is emphasized. 3.2.4.3. The ‘Editorial Notice’ 3.2.4.3.1. The Genre ‘Editorial Notice’ In the present study, the short introductions to technical aspects of the edition are referred to as ‘editorial notices’. These texts occur in all the Euthalian prologues. The function of these meta-communicative texts is to help the reader understand the entire system of the Euthalian edition. To interpret these texts today, when the Euthalian editions in their original form no longer exist, is difficult: The surviving manuscripts may present the editions in a very different form. 3.2.4.3.2. Comments So far, let this be said about them as described in our epitome. But in the following, we will prefix to each (καθ᾽ ἑκάστην) letter a short exposition of the chapters (ἔκθεσις κεφαλαίων), worked out by one of the wisest of our fathers, a Christ lover.

In the oldest surviving witness Codex H, the lists of κεφάλαια-τίτλοι are found distributed so that the list precedes each letter. According to Willard, this is also the most common arrangement in the Euthalian manuscripts. An alternative is to present the κεφάλαιατίτλοι of e.g. all the Pauline letters at the beginning of the manuscript.323 von Dobschütz argued that καθ᾽ ἑκάστην ἐπιστολὴν means ‘with reference to each letter’324 and that the 321 See Dahl 2000d: 239 n. 35. According to Zacagni (PG 85: 788D), the piece on the martyrdom of Onesimus is added also to the ὑπόθεσις of Titus in Aldus’ edition of the New Testament. On the manuscript evidence, see von Soden (1902: 349). The piece probably belongs to the ‘Epitome’ and has later been added to the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις. 322 See Dahl 2000d: 239. 323 For these alternatives, see Willard 1970: 65/2009: 46. 324 See von Dobschütz 1898: 149. In his interpretation of the text, he is followed by Zuntz (1945: 82).

212

Commentary

distribution of the lists immediately before each letter is due to a misunderstanding, or at least in conflict with the intention of the original editor. In the present work, on the other hand, the passage is translated as it apparently was understood in later times. The identity of the father who is referred to is unknown. In one manuscript, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts are ascribed to Pamphilus, who has also been considered the author of the list to the Pauline letters.325 Not only that, but by going over the reading of the text we have with scholarly method indicated briefly the accepted list of the divine testimonies (εὐαπόδεκτος εὕρεσις τῶν θείων μαρτυριῶν)

The reference to the εὕρεσις τῶν θείων μαρτυριῶν is problematic. The present translation is here based on Willard, who renders εὕρεσις ‘list’. It is still not clear what kind of list the prologue here is referring to. The apparatus contains two sets of lists, and probably only one set is original: a) Μαρτυρίαι.326 These are long lists that give the full text of the biblical quotations. In the simplest form of these lists, each quotation is numbered and this number corresponds to a number in the margin of the biblical text.327 The μαρτυρίαι have two main functions. As a mere picture of the biblical text they help the reader to identify the testimonies. This scholarly use does not exclude another important function of the list: It may be used as an excerpt from the biblical text and be read independently of it. b) Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις τῶν μαρτυριῶν.328 These are short lists that do not reproduce the quotations but merely point to them by means of numbers. This form differs from the μαρτυρίαι, since it has no function other than to assist the reader of the biblical text, and the ἀνακεφαλαίωσις is useless without it. There is no consensus among scholars regarding the question of priority.329 The ‘Editorial notice’ uses the term ευρεσις which is not used as a title in the manuscripts. and the most accurate division of the readings (ἡ τῶν ἀναγνώσεων ἀκριβεστάτη τομή)

‘The division of the readings’ also represents a problem. It may refer to the division of the biblical text into lections. Lists of lections are attested in a few manuscripts, but it is not certain whether these existed when this ‘Editoral notice’ was written. Robinson pointed out that the lists of lections are absent from the majority of manuscripts. He argued that the phrase ἡ τῶν ἀναγνώσεων ἀκριβεστάτη τομή should be interpreted in the light of a similar phrase in the Prologue to Acts: μετρίαις ταῖς τῆς ὀλιγομαθοῦς ἡμῶν ἀναγνώσεως τομαῖς. This phrase does not refer to the lection lists, but to the division of the biblical text into sense-lines. Robinson suggested that the words in the ‘Editoral notice’ referred 325 See Harris 1893: 88 and Dahl
E
o 326 According to von Soden, the title μαρτυρίαι occurs as a heading to this form. von Soden (1902: 661) reproduces the full title in one manuscript as μαρτυρίαι ἐκ τῶν θείων γραφῶν, ἃς ἐμνημόνευσεν ὁ ἀπόστολος ἐν ἀμφοτέραις αὐτοῦ ταῖς ἐπιστολαῖς. 327 See Robinson

o 328 According to von Soden (1902: 659) this is the regular title for these lists. 329 Robinson

o
BSHVFE
UIBU
POMZ
UIF
MPOH
MJTUT
CFMPOHFE
UP
UIF
PSJHJOBM
FEJUJPOT
PG
&VUIBMJVT
while von Soden

o
DPOTJEFST
POMZ
UIF
TIPSU
MJTUT
PSJHJOBM


Commentary on the Prologues

213

to the sense-lines also, but that this had not been correctly understood. An ancient scribe or editor may have thought that the ‘Editorial Notice’ here referred to a list. He then created the ‘lection list’ in order to fill what he perceived to be a gap in the apparatus.330 The attractive hypothesis of Robinson thus considers the ‘lection list’ a characteristic feature of the ‘restored’ Euthalian apparatus. If Robinson is correct, the ‘Editorial notice’ here contains a reference to the sense-lines, which are not mentioned elsewhere in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul. 3.2.4.4. The ‘Chronicle of the Preaching of Paul’ 3.2.4.4.1. The Genre ‘Chronicle’ This section is in the present translation labeled ‘Chronicle’. The main characteristic of this genre is the places of a series of events within a chronological framework. The genre is represented by the Breviarium of Eutropius, where the years of consulships and the reckoning ab urbe condita are repeatedly referred to.331 Works belonging to the genre may be based on more comprehensive historical works and represent them in a condensed form, as the Books of Chronicles represent an abridgement and reworking of earlier historical books of the Old Testament. The ‘Chronicle of the Preaching of Paul’ is also presented as a ‘summary’ (ἀνακεφαλαίωσις) of the chronological tables of Eusebius. Thus, it is close to the genre ‘epitome’. 3.2.4.4.2. Structure and Pre-texts The ‘Chronicle’ may be divided as in the following list. Harris has argued convincingly that the author had access both to Eusebius’ History of the Church and his Chronikon. The following table is reproduced from the work of Harris. Euthalius

Eusebius

H. E. ii, 25 Ἀνεῖλεν μὲν Ἀγριππίναν πρῶτα τὴν ἰδίαν Μητέρα δὲ ὁμοίως καὶ ἀδελφοὺς καὶ γυναῖκα μητέρα, ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν ἀδελφὴν τοῦ πατρὸς, καὶ σὺν καὶ ἄλλοις μυρίοις τῷ γένει προσήκουσι… Ὀκταουΐαν τὴν ἑαυτοῦ γυναῖκα, καὶ ἄλλους Chronikon, quoted by Syncellus 636.8 μυρίους τῷ γένει προσήκοντας· Νέρων ἀνεῖλε τὴν ἑαυτοῦ μητέρα Ἀγριππίναν καὶ τὴν τοῦ πατρὸς ἀδελφήν. Chronikon Armen. Neron cum aliis viris illustribus et Hochtabiam uxorem suam interfecit. Chronikon quoted by Cedrenus, Historiarum compendium 360.17 Καὶ ἄλλους μυρίους τῷ γένει προσήκοντας. 330 See Robinson

o 331 Cf. the preface of the Breviarium of Eutropius (Text in C. Santini 1979: 2): Res Romanas ex voluntate mansuetudinis tuae ab urbe condita ad nostram memoriam, quae in negotiis vel bellicis vel civilibus eminebant, per ordinem temporum brevi narratione collegi […]. ‘In keeping with the wish of your Clemency I have gathered in a brief narrative, in chronological sequence, the conspicuous achievments of the Romans, whether in war or piece […].’ (Tr. H. W. Bird 1993: 1).

214 Euthalius

Commentary

Eusebius

H. E. ii, 25 Mετέπειτα δὲ καθολικὸν ἐκίνησε διωγμὸν Ταύτῃ γοῦν οὗτος θεομάχος ἐν τοῖς μάλιστα κατὰ τῶν Χριστιανῶν, καὶ οὕτως ἐπὶ τὰς κατὰ πρῶτος ἀνακηρυχθεὶς, ἐπὶ τὰς κατὰ τῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων ἐπήρθη σφαγάς. ἀποστόλων ἐπήρθη σφαγάς. Chronikon, quoted by Syncellus 644.2 Ἐπὶ πᾶσιν δ᾽ αὐτοῦ τοῖς ἀτυχήμασι καὶ τὸν πρῶτον κατὰ Χριστιανῶν ἐνεδείξατο διωγμὸν, ἡνίκα Πέτρος καὶ Παῦλος… Euthalius

Eusebius

H. E. ii, 25 He killed Agrippina, his own mother, and also And also his mother, his brothers, his wife and his father’s sister, his own wife Octavia and countless other relatives. countless other relatives. Chronikon, quoted by Syncellus 636.8 Nero killed his own mother, Agrippina, and his father’s sister. Chronikon Armen. Nero killed his wife Octavia together with other eminent men. Chronikon quoted by Cedrenus Historiarum compendium 360.17 And countless other relatives. H. E. ii, 25 After that, he instigated a general persecution Then, having been proclaimed the first enemy of the Christians. And thus, he was roused to of God, he was roused to bring slaughter upon bring slaughter upon the apostles. the apostles. Chronikon, quoted by Syncellus 644.2 In addition to all the other calamities he brought, he also began the first persecution of Christians, when Peter and Paul…

The references in the list below are based on the work of Harris.332 The author of the ‘Chronicle’ has basically rewritten passages from Eusebius’ History and placed them within the timeline of the Chronicon. The quotations from 2 Tim (o
BOE
Co
are presumably also mediated through Eusebius, since they are found also in H. E. ii, 22. 1. Introduction (with reference to the Eusebius’ Chronikon) 2. The period from the passion of Christ to Paul’s imprisonment in Rome (pre-texts: Eusebius’ Chronikon and H. E. ii, 1 and 22) 3. On the use of sources (with reference to Eusebius’ History of the Church) 4. From Paul’s first defense to his martyrdom (pre-texts: Chronikon and H. E. ii, 22 and 25) 332 See Harris 1896: 67.

Commentary on the Prologues

215

5. Chronological summary (pre-texts: Chronikon and H. E. ii, 22 and 25) 6. Appeal to the reader (appeal to trust the authority of Eusebius) 3.2.4.4.3. Comments [Introduction] I also considered it necessary (ἀναγκαῖον δὲ ἡγησάμην) to indicate briefly the period of time covered by the preaching of Paul, by making a summary based on the chronological tables of Eusebius, the disciple of Pamphilos.

The opening formula ἀναγκαῖον δὲ ἡγησάμην of the ‘Chronicle’ is the conventional opening of a scientific work. Alexander lists this form among the most common topics in the scientific prefaces.333 The ‘Chronicle’ has a special place in the Euthalian apparatus as it explicitly mentions the names of Eusebius and Pamphilus. In general, the apparatus does not mention the names of any Christian writers other than the biblical authors themselves. von Dobschütz has argued that the apparatus for later scribes and translators may have appeared almost as an integral part of the biblical text.334 The lack of explicit references in the apparatus to the Fathers confirms his assumption. Since the ‘Chronicle’ is different with regard to this, it is closer to the catena type of commentary than any other element of the Euthalian apparatus. [From the passion of Christ to Paul’s imprisonment in Rome] When I get the book in my hand and open it, I find that the passion of our Savior, His resurrection on the third day, and the assumption of Christ back to heaven happened in the eighteenth year of the emperor Tiberius.

Harris observed that the dating of the Passion of Christ to the 18th year of Tiberius (~ 31 AD) is in agreement with the Hieronymian version of the Chronikon but in conflict with the Greek text preserved in Syncellus and the Armenian translation of Eusebius. Both date the Passion in the 19th year of Tiberius.335 [From Paul’s first defense to his martyrdom] Then it happened, in the thirty-sixth year after the passion of our Savior, in the thirteenth year of Nero, that Paul died as a martyr by having his head cut off by the sword. 333 See Alexander

o
BOE
o
*O
UIF
NBUFSJBM
SFGFSSFE
UP
CZ
"MFYBOEFS
UIF
QSFGBDF
PG
)FSon’s Pneumatika is closest to the ‘Chronicle’: Τῆς πνευματικῆς πραγματείας σπουδῆς ἠξιωμένης πρὸς τῶν παλαιῶν φιλοσόφων τε καὶ μηχανικῶν […] ἀναγκαῖον ὑπάρχειν νομίζομεν καὶ αὐτοὶ τὰ παραδοθέντα ὑπὸ τῶν ἀρχαίων εἰς τάξιν ἀγαγεῖν. ‘Since the science of pneumatics was considered worth studying by the ancient philosophers and mechanics […] we, too, consider it necessary to present in an orderly fashion what has been handed down by the ancients.’ See also the study by Rydbeck on the language of the NT (1967), and his synoptic table with comments on the prefaces on Luke and Heron (L. Rydbeck

o 
334 von Dobschütz (1899: 154) here refers to the Syriac translators of the Euthalian apparatus, arguing that the presence of the apparatus in the Bible translations of the Monophysites (and not in the Peshitta) has no significance for the origin of the apparatus: The translators may have considered the apparatus part of the biblical text. 335 See Harris 1896: 65. Harris gives the following text of Eusebius (quoted in Syncellus): Ἰησοῦς ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν κατὰ τὰς περὶ αὐτοῦ προφητείας ἐπὶ τὸ πάθος προῄει ἔτους ιθ´τῆς Τιβερίου βασιλείας. ‘Jesus Christ, the Son of God, our Lord, proceeded to His Passion, according to the prophecies concerning Him, in the 19th year of the reign of Tiberius.’

216

Commentary

According to Willard, the dating of Paul’s death in the 36th year of the Passion, and in the 13th year of Nero coincides with one of the dates given in the Martyrdom.336 This corresponds to our year 66 AD, which in the Martyrdom is reckoned as the 69th year of the coming of Christ. 3.2.5. Prologue to the Letters of Paul: Summary Structure and composition. The Euthalian Prologue to the Letters of Paul is composed according to a common scheme with a prologus praeter rem placed first. This section opens the communication between author and reader and serves to justify the author and his undertaking in the eyes of the reader. In this prologue, this section is kept within reasonable limits, and the bulk of the prologue is made up by the prologus ante rem, which is related to the work itself, i.e. the Euthalian edition of the Pauline letters. The prologues ante rem is seemingly a composite work. On the basis of both internal and external evidence, the three main parts the ‘Life’, the ‘Epitome’ and the ‘Chronicle’ may be originally independent of each other. This is especially clear with respect to the ‘Life’ and the ‘Chronicle’. They treat basically the same subject matter, but are quite different as far as their method is concerned. The ‘Life’ depends apparently upon the biblical books (Acts and the Pauline letters) as pre-texts, while the ‘Chronicle’ seems rather to be based on the works of Eusebius. The ‘Life’ is uninterested in questions of chronology, referring to this with vague expression like ‘after some time’. The ‘Chronicle’, on the other hand, is structured on the basis of the timeline of Eusebius’ Chronikon, using that work as the starting point for various calculations. Moreover, there is also no evident coherence between the ‘Life’ and the ‘Epitome’. The ‘Life’ includes a short paragraph on Paul’s letter writing, but contains no forecast of the relatively comprehensive treatment of the letters that follows. An interesting feature of the ‘Epitome’ is the idea that the letters of Paul are ordered according to the degree of progress of the communities. This is the only perspective the ‘Epitome’ has on the collection, and it does in general not attempt to relate the letters to different phases in the life of Paul. The only exception is 2 Tim which obviously refers to Paul’s martyrdom. The meta-terminology. The ‘Life’ refers to Paul’s letter writing as an act of strengthening (βεβαιόω) the disciples. The contents of the letters is characterized as διδασκαλία. The ‘Epitome’ offers a richer material. Here the term παραινέσεις is used with reference to the entire collection. Paul’s exhortations concerning ‘life and virtue’ are apparently considered the most important feature of his letters. This theme is related to the view that the Pauline letters form a coherent treatment of all aspects of proper social conduct. This does not mean, however, that Paul’s fight against heresy is completely forgotten (see below), rather that this theme seems here to be less important. The ‘Epitome’ also supposes a special affinity to exist between Rom and Eph, describing both letters as εἰσαγωγή ‘introduction’ and ἀρχαί ‘first principles’. The ‘Chronicle’, on the other hand, does not give the letters any independent treatment. A few passages from Paul’s letters that refer to his martyrdom are quoted.

336 See Willard 1970: 205, n. 1/2009: 154, n. 22.

Commentary on the Prologues

217

The paraphrase. The short descriptions of the life of Paul found in the ‘Life’ and the ‘Chronicle’ are both incomplete. This is only to be expected. The pre-texts contained so much material that it would be impossible to include all of it. It should, however, be noted that different material is omitted in the ‘Life’ and the ‘Chronicle’. The ‘Life’ includes the story of Ananias (Acts 9) and the story of Paul’s meeting with Peter in Jerusalem (Gal 2). Both are omitted in the ‘Chronicle’. The ‘Chronicle’, on the other hand, has included Paul’s imprisonment in Caesarea, which is not mentioned in the ‘Life’. The most striking divergence between the two is the description of the prosecution against Paul: The ‘Chronicle’ has the story of Paul’s two defenses before Nero, which is derived from Eusebius. The ‘Paulusbild’. The ‘Life’ includes a description of the pre-Christian Paul. This description goes to great lengths to emphasize the cruelty of his persecution. The model is the picture painted in Acts, but this picture has been elaborated in various ways. The section on the pre-Christian Paul is also an opportunity for the ‘Life’ to express some harsh anti-Jewish sentiments. The ‘Life’ puts great emphasis on the fury (μανία) of the Jews. Although Paul shares the fury of his countrymen, he has magnified it so that his fury alone is greater than that of the whole people. When he sets out to Damascus, his aim is not to bring the Christians back as prisoners to Jerusalem but rather to send them into the ‘pit of perdition’. In the murder of Stephen, Paul is described as responsible for the act. The ‘Chronicle’ also includes a description of the pre-Christian Paul, but this description is not extreme and seems closer to Acts: In the description of the murder of Stephen, the ‘Chronicle’ follows Acts in saying that Paul consented to the murder. In the description of Paul after his conversion, the ‘Life’, the ‘Epitome’ and the ‘Chronicle’ present a fairly unified picture. All three texts refer to Paul as ‘Paul the Apostle’ or simply ‘the Apostle’. They share this feature with the Pauline letters, although the opponents of Paul are in all three texts the ‘Jews’. The ‘Epitome’ mentions briefly that Paul in 2 Tim foretold the rising of the heretics, but the nature of this heresy is not explained. The ‘Epitome’ also mentions the deceits of philosophy, but this philosophy may have been conceived as Jewish as well. It is an interesting feature of the ‘Epitome’ that the Galatians are said simply to have defected to ‘Judaism’, and that Paul therefore ends this letter as though he were bidding them farewell. But the picture of the Jewish religion is not a purely negative one. The ‘Epitome’ states that there is a continued progress within the collective and the Hebrews belong to the most advanced group. This is related to their suffering of persecution, but the translation of the ‘Jewish mysteries’ to Christ is also said to be a theme in this letter. The most important aspect of the work of Paul seems to be the paraenetic. This is especially emphasized in the introduction to the ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters’, where his writings are referred to as ‘many exhortations’ (πολλαὶ παραινέσεις). Another aspect of the ‘Paulusbild’ that is present in all three texts, is the strong interest in the martyrdom of Paul.

218

Commentary

3.3. Commentary on the Prologue to the Catholic Letters 3.3.1. Structure of the Prologue to the Catholic Letters The Prologue to the Catholic letters has the prologus praeter rem in the form of a ‘prooemium’ placed first. This is the longest section. It is followed by a brief prologus ante rem in the form of an ‘Editorial Notice’ on the apparatus. This prologue differs from the other Euthalian prologues as it does not contain any introductory material to the biblical text, but refers only to the work the editor has done on that text. 3.3.2. The Heading to the Prologue to the Catholic Letters According to von Soden, the heading is usually transmitted in the form πρόλογος τῶν καθολικῶν ἐπιστολῶν or occasionally in the short form πρόλογος. He further points out that the heading does not contain the name ‘Euthalius’ except in min. 181.337 Min. 181 has the following text: εὐθαλίου ἐπισκόπου σούλκης ἔκθεσις κεφαλαίων τῶν καθολικῶν ἑπτὰ ἐπιστολῶν σταλεῖσα πρὸς ἀθανάσιον ἐπίσκοπον ἀλεξανδρείας. ‘Survey of the Chapters of the Seven Catholic Epistles by Euthalius, bishop of Sulci, sent to Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria.’338 A remarkable feature of this variant is that it is seemingly not intended as a heading to the prologue at all but to a list of κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. The present translation is based on the form πρόλογος τῶν καθολικῶν ἐπιστολῶν. This has been chosen for the sake of clarity. As for the question of priority, the shortest form πρόλογος should be preferred. 3.3.3. Prologus praeter rem 3.3.3.1. Comments on the ‘Prooemium’ And I, the smallest one, in trying to do something beyond my powers, have certainly not escaped danger, like someone who believes he can cleave the waves in the middle of the sea on the most tiny raft and fancies he well can bear the unruly blow of the winds.

The modesty topos is markedly present in this prologue.339 It returns to the image of the work as a sea voyage, which was used in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul. In this prologue, the man is not on a boat, but on a tiny raft, an image that resembles Odysseus on his way from the island of Ogygia (Od
7
o 340 This image is carefully chosen, since the raft corresponds to the couch in the second image in this prologue, the healing of the lame in .L
o
ćF
JNQFUVPVT
NBO
PO
UIF
SBę
JT
UIF
DPVOUFSQBSU
PG
UIF
MBNF
man on the couch, who was saved through his faith. The two images both serve to embellish the appeal for intercession (see below).

337 See von Soden

o 338 Text in von Dobschütz 1893: 64. von Dobschütz finds that this form reflects the tendency to conformity in this manuscript, since the text is very close to the heading to the Prologue to Acts. 339 See See note 274 on page 198. 340 The sailor in a tiny vessel depending on divine assistance was proverbial. In Theophilus of Antioch the following saying is ascribed to Thestius: θεοῦ θέλοντος σῴζῃ, κἂν ἐπὶ ῥῖπος πλέῃς (Ad Autolycum 2, 8). ‘If God will, you are safe, even if you sail on a mat.’ (Tr. R. M. Grant 1970: 37).

Commentary on the Prologues

219

Therefore, I ask for forgiveness for what I dare to do, having been forced by the law of love, by you, most reverend brother Athanasius […] Receive therefore, receive from us with pleasure, the work carried out at your orders, and in return for our obedience, pray for us till the end.

As in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, the work was made at the instigation of the dedicatee, who is addressed directly and asked to intercede for the author. The difference between this and the previous prologue is that the dedicatee here is named, and that he here (and in the Prologue to Acts) is addressed as a ‘brother’ not as a ‘father’. This difference has occasioned many theories regarding the career of Euthalius: The address ‘brother’ is believed to be evidence that this Euthalius now is writing to a fellow bishop. Thus, Euthalius had supposedly made the edition of the Pauline letters while still a deacon, and when he became bishop of the mysterious city of Sulci, he published the edition of Acts and the Catholic letters.341 3.3.4. Prologus ante rem 3.3.4.1. Comments on the ‘Editorial Notice’ I will read the Catholic Epistles one after another, verse by verse (στιχηδόν), and at the same time make a mediocre exposition (ἔκθεσις) from this of their chapters and divine testimonies.

In contrast to the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, the modesty topos is here also present in the ‘Editorial Notice’. The description of the edition is not entirely clear, and its interpretation is made difficult as we do not have the Euthalian edition before us in its original form. The first problem is the expression ‘one after another’. Does this presuppose the same sequence of the Catholic letters as that found in our modern Bible editions?342 This question cannot be answered on the basis of this prologue, since it does not discuss the single letters. The second problem is the adverb στιχηδόν. This is associated with the noun στίχος, which has a double meaning: a) The στίχος is a standard line of approximately 16 syllables. That the στίχος corresponded to the standard hexameter line was argued convincingly by Harris, who draws a distinction between the στίχος and στιχηδόν: The noun refers to the ‘standard line’ but the adverb may refer to a sense-line. The ‘sense-line’ may not necessarily correspond to a real line in the manuscript, but be indicated by punctuation only.343 b) The στίχος is sense-line. This use of the term στίχος is now rarely encountered. If this meaning is adopted, there is a close association between στίχος and the adverb στιχηδόν, which refers to the writing of the text in sense-lines. Among schol341 This theory is found already in Zacagni (1698: lxiii), who thought that Euthalius was made bishop of Sulci because of the merits he earned by his edition of the Pauline letters. The most detailed account is found in von Soden

o


TFF
BCPWF
PO
UIF
)JTUPSZ
PG
3FTFBSDI 342 On this problem, see Jülicher/Fascher

o 343 See Harris

XJUI
B
MBSHF
DPMMFDUJPO
PG
NBUFSJBM
PO
QQ
o
"DDPSEJOH
UP
Harris

o 312), confusion arises at a later stage, when the term στιχηδόν is applied to ‘colon-writing’. His example is the words of Hesychios (PG 93: 1340) on his edition of the minor prophets. Here he understands the word στιχηδόν to refer to interpunction, which is a first step towards writing the text in cola. In this he is followed by Zuntz

o
BOE
Willard

o
 


220

Commentary

ars discussing Euthalius, this view of στίχος/στιχηδόν is found in Wettstein344 and Islinger.345 Thus, although their terminology is not identical, all scholars agree that the Prologue to the Catholic letters here refers to sense-lines. The present translation uses the English ‘verse’ in order to avoid a too technical terminology and also preserve some of the ambiguity of the original. It should be remembered that it is not known how these sense-lines originally were indicated. Another problem with the ‘Editorial Notice’ is that the ‘lections’ (ἀναγνώσεις) are not mentioned at all. von Soden was perplexed by this and suspected a primitive error in the textual tradition: Euthalius would, according to von Soden, not have been capable of such an omission.346 3.3.5. The Prologue to the Catholic letters: Summary In contrast to the Prologue to the Pauline letters, we find that the modesty topos here dominates entirely. The prologue contains no material related to the Catholic letters and the prologus ante rem focuses on the characteristic features of the Euthalian edition only.

3.4. Commentary on the Prologue to Acts 3.4.1. Structure of the Prologue to Acts The prologue may be divided as follows: 1. Prologus praeter rem a. Prooemium b. Encomium of Melete, the personified meditation on Scripture 2. Prologus ante rem c. Editorial Notice d. Epitome of Acts A striking feature of this prologue is the long ‘Encomium of Melete’ which occurs after the prooemium. The presence of this piece makes the prologue quite asymmetric in its structure. Much is here said about Bible study and its benefits, but the prologue contains

344 Wettstein (1752: 75) defines the στίχοι as minores distinctiones and has the following to say on the work of Euthalius (p. 74): Libros istos etiam στιχηδὸν scripsit, id est, ita ut singulae lineae singulae sententias absolverent, eaque distinctione observata lectores scire possent, quae continuo spiritu legerent & ubi paulum intermitterent. ‘He also wrote these books στιχηδόν, i.e., so that each line completed its meaning, and the readers, through observance of this distinction, could know what they should read with one breath and where they should make a short break.’ 345 Islinger (1867: 4) seems to be deriving much from Wettstein, but introduces a different terminology. According to Islinger, writing στιχηδόν is the same as writing κατὰ ῥήσεις, each ῥῆσις being the words that the speaker should recite as a unity ‘ohne mit der Stimme abzusetzen’. A. C. Clark (1933: 178) shares the view of Wettstein and Islinger regarding the meaning of στίχος. He argues against the existence of the ‘normal line’, saying that the theory is not supported by the material from the papyri where all sort of sizes are found. 346 See von Soden

o

Commentary on the Prologues

221

little that is relevant for the study of Acts. The prologus praeter rem occupies the bulk of this prologue, as in the Prologue to the Catholic letters. 3.4.2. The Heading to the Prologue to Acts Both Zacagni and von Soden reproduce the heading in its shortest form, πρόλογος τῶν πράξεων.347 In the present translation this is rendered ‘Prologue to Acts’. One should note that the πράξεις here possibly refers not to the Book of Acts only but to the combination of Acts and the Catholic letters.348 The fact that this prologue mentions both Acts and the Catholic letters may be evidence of this.349 If this is the case, the Prologue to the Catholic letters may be a later supplement written in order to create a perfect symmetry in the apparatus. 3.4.3. Prologus praeter rem 3.4.3.1. Comments on the ‘Prooemium’ They meditate day and night in their own souls on the words about the divine Word. [ἀληθῶς τὸ τῆς ἀγλαοφεγγοῦς καὶ μακαρίας ταύτης ἡμεροτρωθέντες] and taste its virtuous and divine fruits, they withdraw their minds from everything else, and now, rejoicing, they turn their eyes upwards to immortality itself.

The context is the description in the ‘Prooemium’ of the heavenly and godly community. This apparently refers to a monastic community, and it should be noted that in the entire apparatus, only the Prologue to Acts refers to the recipients as living in a monastic community.350 They have chosen the first beatitude of David (= Psalm 1) as their guideline and meditate day and night upon ‘the words about the divine Word.’ After this follows the apparently corrupt clause ἀληθῶς τὸ τῆς ἀγλαοφεγγοῦς καὶ μακαρίας ταύτης ἡμεροτρωθέντες. The main difficulties are (1) the meaning of the participle ἡμεροτρωθέντες, a word that Harris considered non-existent in Greek,351 and, (2) the meaning of the phrase τὸ … ταύτης. Both Zacagni and Harris tried to solve the problem by making conjectures: 347 von Soden (1902: 667) notes that the heading occasionally is transmitted with various expansions, such as τῶν ἀποστόλων or τῶν ἁγίων ἀποστόλων. Min. 181 has the peculiar form Ἀθανασίου ἐπισκόπου Σούλκης ἔκθεσις κεφαλαίων τῶν πράξεων σταλεῖσα πρὸς Ἀθανάσιον ἐπίσκοπον Ἀλεξανδρείας. The word Ἀθανασίου is clearly an error, anticipating the name of the dedicatee. Zacagni restored the name Εὐθαλίου in this heading. It follows the same pattern as the heading to the Prologue to the Catholic letters and seems rather to be a heading to a list of κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. On the different forms of headings, see also von Dobschütz 1893: 64 and Willard

o
o 348 On this meaning of πράξεις, see Souter 1913: 12. 349 See the ‘Editorial Notice’ in this prologue: ‘Being such an eminent lover of the word, and incessantly honoring this task, as a friend, and praising it always, you just ordered me, my best friend, brother Athanasius, to read the Book of Acts and the Catholic Epistles with a correct pronunciation […].’ 350 See von Dobschütz (1893: 65), who made this observation: ‘Unrichtig aber ist es, dass es sich beidesmal um den gleichen Kreis von Vätern und Brüdern einer Mönchsgemeinschaft handle. Nur im Prolog zu Act. Ap. finden sich die ἀδελφοὶ καὶ πατέρες, welche er bittet, seine Kühnheit zu entschuldigen und die Fehler ἀδελφικῶς zu korrigieren.’ 351 According to Harris (1896: 76) such a word would have the meaning ‘gently pierced’ (as if from ἥμερος and τιτρώσκω).

222

Commentary

Textual conjectures Zacagni’s text (Zacagni 1698: τὸ τῆς ἀγλαοφεγγοῦς καὶ Lauto hocce felique cibo 404 = PG 85: 628A) with his μακαρίας ταύτης (τροφῆς) quotidie sumpto addition of τροφῆς: ἡμεροτρωθέντες ‘having daily consumed this resplendent and blessed nourishment’ (my translation) Harris’ text (1896: 76) reading τῷ τῆς ἀγλαοφεγγοῦς καὶ ‘smitten with passion for this τῷ for τὸ and ἱμέρῳ τρωθέντες μακαρίας ταύτης ἱμέρῳ resplendent and blessed creaἡμεροτρωθέντες: τρωθέντες ture’

Zacagni added the word τροφῆς, thus making the clause refer to the daily meditation on scripture as ‘nourishment’. Harris rejected the word ἡμεροτρωθέντες and understood it as an itacistic error for ἱμέρῳ τρωθέντες. According to Harris, the clause refers to the passion (ἵμερος) the dedicatee feels for Melete (meditation on Scripture). This is the ‘creature’ that Harris thinks is hiding behind the transmitted text. If this is correct, this personification is alluded to already in the opening of the ‘Prooemium’. It is not necessary to adopt any of these conjectures. Even if the words of the two conjectures are quite different, they are not so far from each other in meaning: The original text apparently contained a praise of the benefits of scriptural reading, whether this was personified or referred to as ‘blessed nourishment’. First, I read and wrote the Apostolic Book in verses (τὴν ἀποστολικὴν βίβλον στιχηδὸν ἀναγνούς τε καὶ γράψας) and sent it not long ago to one of our fathers in Christ

The description of the earlier edition of the Pauline letters is interesting, since it is the only cross-reference that is found between the Euthalian prologues. In the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, there is no mention of a future work, and the short Prologue to the Catholic Letters does not refer to the other prologues. The lack of any reference in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul can easily be explained by assuming that the edition of Acts was not planned at that stage. It is an interesting feature of this prologue that it uses a new term to describe the edition of the Pauline letters: In the Prologue to Acts (as in the Prologue to the Catholic Letters) the term στιχηδόν is used. This term probably refers to sense-lines although it is not clear at this point how the divisions were indicated.352 When the author says ‘read and wrote’, he seems to present himself not only as an editor of the text, but also as a scribe. The idea that he himself wrote the manuscript is however not supported by what he says in the following about molesting the work of others (see below). For I have no knowledge that any servant of the word previously with zeal has worked out the shape (τὸ σχῆμα) of this writing. For there was never a man so stubborn and audacious that he himself would cruelly molest (ἀφειδῶς καθυβρίζειν) the painstaking work of others (τοὺς ἑτέρους εὖ μάλα πεποιημένους πόνους) with mediocre divisions of our unlearned reading.

In this continued description of the edition of the Pauline letters, the reader may learn more about that edition than the information contained in the Prologue to the Letters of 352 See my comments on the ‘Editorial Notice’ in the Prologue to the Catholic Letters above. The term στιχηδόν is not used in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, whose language is not quite clear regarding what the author had done with the biblical text.

Commentary on the Prologues

223

Paul.353 The work of the editor concerns the shape (σχῆμα) of the biblical text. The shape is clearly related to some kind of division of the text. The author has ‘cruelly molested’ the painstaking work of others with his divisions. This probably means that he has added marks in manuscripts that were already written by an earlier scribe. The idea of ‘molesting’ can hardly refer to the production of a new manuscript. The sense-lines were thus probably not separate lines in the manuscript, but marked by lectional signs. This interpretation of the work done by Euthalius is found in von Soden and was adopted by Bousset.354 The problem with this interpretation is the description above, where the author uses the expression στιχηδὸν ἀναγνούς τε καὶ γράψας with reference to his own work. Possibly, this expression may refer to the division of the sense-lines only. 3.4.3.2. The ‘Encomium of Melete’ 3.4.3.2.1. The Genre ‘Encomium’ The genre ‘Encomium’ praises the qualities of a person, a thing or an abstract idea. It thus belongs at a higher level of abstraction to the epideictic genre.355 The praise of a personified virtue may however give epideictic oratory a deliberative function. 3.4.3.2.2. Comments on the ‘Encomium’ I speak of wisdom-bringing meditation on the divine words, in whose power and in whose nets you are, Christ lover, being heard through long and sleepless exercises, busy with her beloved name, as you are making her bloom exceedingly.

Greek μελέτη may refer to physical training or to scholarly study. The term is used in Psalm 118: 97 and 99 for meditation upon the Law, rendering Hebrew shichah. In the ‘Encomium’ μελέτη is personified. The image of the dedicatee in the nets of Melete is close to the image in 84JS
o
XIFSF
UIF
TPO
JT
BTLFE
UP
QVU
IJT
GFFU
JOUP
UIF
GFUters of Wisdom, whose bands are purple lace. In the ‘Encomium’, as in this prologue in general, the meditation on Scripture is closely associated with progress, especially in the image of the artist (see below). This idea is also found in a Deutero-Pauline letter: ἕως ἔρχομαι πρόσεχε τῇ ἀναγνώσει […] ταῦτα μελέτα, ἐν τούτοις ἴσθι, ἵνα σου ἡ προκοπὴ φανερὰ ᾖ ἐν πασιν (
5JN
o 
ćF
MBTU
DMBVTF
XPVME
CF
BO
FYDFMMFOU
TVNNBSZ
PG
UIF
‘Encomium’. The correspondence is probably due to the dependence of both texts upon the traditions of Wisdom literature.356

353 This was observed by Robinson (1895: 13), who found that we here ‘gain fresh light as to the earlier work on the Pauline Epistles.’ 354 See von Soden 1902: 666 and Bousset 1903. 355 On the genre ‘encomion’, see M. Vallozza 1994. 356 On 1 Tim 4:15, see Marshall

o
Marshall chooses the translation ‘practice’ for the imperative μελέτα. As for the idea of progress (προκοπή), he finds that the word-group belongs more to Hellenism, being found in the LXX only in WSir 51:17 and 2 Macc 8:8. The language in WSir 51:17 is close to the Euthalian prologue: προκοπὴ ἐγένετό μοι ἐν αὐτῇ· τῷ διδόντι μοι σοφίαν δώσω δόξαν. ‘By her [i.e. Wisdom], there was progress for me. I will give honor to Him who gives me wisdom.’

224

Commentary

As also one of the poets has truly said, recommending the most wonderful benefits that come to us from her. He almost cries out and says that ‘Melete benefits the work’ (Hesiod, Erga 412). And again, the most noble of the wise (πανάριστος σοφῶν = Cleoboulus of Lindos) has, in his advice on how to live, attributed everything to Melete. ‘For, blessed’, he says, ‘is he who meditates (μελετήσει) on the law of the Lord day and night’. 1T
o ‘Hear, O Israel…’ %FVU
o ‘The meditation (ἡ μελέτη) of my heart is always in thy sight, O Lord, my helper and my redeemer.’ Ps 18:15 ‘Cursed be he who does not confirm all the words in this book of law by doing them.’ Deut 27:26

The praise of Melete is illustrated by a number of quotations. It is a characteristic feature of this prologue that quotations from pagan authors are used together with quotations from the OT books.357 For, as a clever artist who has come upon the most beautiful work of his art, for the remainder he works over again its tiniest parts, adjusting them and bringing them into harmony, he searches always, using a thousand devices, to bring his own design to still greater perfection.

The meditation on Scripture is finally compared to the artist who puts together his work, formed in tiny parts, possibly alluding to the sense-lines. The image refers to the ancient practice of making a statue out of minor parts that were made in separate molds. Perfect harmony is attained when the seams are no longer visible. 3.4.4. Prologus ante rem 3.4.4.1. Comments on the ‘Editorial Notice’ to read the Book of Acts and the Catholic Epistles with a correct pronunciation (ἀναγνῶναι κατὰ προσῳδίαν)

The first task of the author was to read the biblical book κατὰ προσῳδίαν. According to Zuntz, this phrase originally referred to the reading of the text with the right pitch and tone. The προσῳδίαι were originally the three accent signs. Later it also included a larger group of signs that signified breathings, word divisions and vowel length.358 The reading of the text aloud κατὰ προσῳδίαν is necessary for the editor who will, probably at the same time, add the προσῳδίαι to the text he is working on. Since we do not have detailed knowledge of the system used in the Euthalian edition, I have rendered the phase ἀναγνῶναι κατὰ προσῳδίαν as ‘reading with a correct pronunciation.’ The Euthalian edi-

357 All the quotations were identified by Zacagni (PG

o 
ćF
BUUSJCVUJPO
PG
FWFSZUIJOH
UP
.FMFUF
(Μελέτη τὸ πᾶν) is only paraphrased in the text. Fabricius (quoted by Galland in PG 
o
GPVOE
that this maxim is ascribed to Cleoboulus of Lindos, one of the Seven Sages of Greece. This explains the description of him as πανάριστος σοφῶν. 358 That this was one of the tasks of Euthalius was perceived already by Wettstein (1752: 73): [Euthalius] istis libris primus spritus & accentus apposuit. ‘[Euthalius] was the first who added breathings and accents to those books.’ Zuntz

o
IBT
BEEFE
NPSF
BODJFOU
FWJEFODF
RVPUJOH
&QJQIBOJVT
On Weights and Measures (PG 43: 237B), who lists the ten προσῳδίαι.

Commentary on the Prologues

225

tions was thus a help for the reader who was supposed to read the text with the educated, ‘received’ pronunciation of Greek.359 … make some summaries (πως ἀνακεφαλαιώσασθαι)

The second task is described with a vague phrase. It is not clear what this refers to. von Soden assumed that the author here referred to various lists that were similar to those in the edition of the Pauline letters. The author possibly did not bother to describe them in detail, as they were known from the earlier edition.360 This would be a strange negligence on the part of the author, since the two editions were sent to different recipients. … and divide the contents of both of them into smaller parts (διελεῖν τούτων ἑκάστης τὸν νοῦν λεπτομερῶς). And this I have done with zeal, without hesitation. Having organized the texts into verses (στιχηδόν) according to my own design (συμμετρία), aiming at a clear reading (εὔσημος ἀνάγνωσις), I sent them both promptly to you.

The third task is the division of the text into sense-lines. The author has organized the text into verses since his aim was the clear reading of the biblical text. This last task has already been described by the author above, in his treatment of the earlier edition of the Pauline letters. 3.4.4.2. Comments on the ‘Epitome of Acts’ In the following I have prefixed a short summary of the work of Luke the Evangelist. He was of Antiochene ancestry and learned in medicine. After he had become a disciple of Paul, he composed two books. The first of them was the Gospel, the second the book about the apostolic acts.

The ‘Epitome of Acts’ has no title in the original. The designation ‘Epitome’ is used here since it is not only a ὑπόθεσις of Acts, but refers to the background of the author and his authorship of both the Gospel and Acts. According to von Soden, the ‘Epitome’ is also transmitted independently of the Euthalian prologue with the heading πρόλογς τῶν πράξεων.361 Luke’s Antiochene ancestry and his being learned in medicine are motives that are found repeatedly from Eusebius onwards.362 359 The phenomenon of the double pronunciation of Greek in antiquity and beyond is an obscure subject of which little is known. Scholars of Greek origin tend to assume that the modern pronunciation prevailed at a quite early stage. It appears, however, that the pronunciation in schools differed much from the everyday language. An early study is that of Prince Trubetzkoy (1936), one of the founders of the Prague school of linguistics. In this study he argued that certain archaic features (such as the pronunciation of φχθ as aspirated stops) were still practiced in Byzantine schools in the 10th cent. This archaism in pronunciation may have included other features as well, such as distinction in vowel length. The composition of poetry written in the old meters throughout the Byzantine era (e.g. Tzetzes in the 12th cent.) may be evidence of the survival of the ancient pronunciation, unless one presupposes that this poetry was written not for the ear but for the eye only. The evidence of Coptic also shows that it was an archaic pronunciation of Greek (generally non-itacistic) that served as a model for the scholars who created this writing system, see G. Steindorff 1951: 13. This was probably the pronunciation of Greek in the Christian schools of Alexandria. If the Euthalian apparatus is of Egyptian provenance, as many scholars have believed, this evidence may be relevant for the study of this aspect of the apparatus. 360 See von Soden 1902: 670. 361 When transmitted independently, the transitory clause is not included and the text begins: Ἀντιοχεὺς ὑπάρχων τὸ γένος ὁ Λουκᾶς κτλ. See von Soden 1902: 330. It may be noted that the heading πρόλογος τῶν πράξεων is a much better description of this piece than of the entire Euthalian prologue. 362 See above on the ὑπόθεσις of Acts.

226

Commentary

So, the entire content of this volume is about the ascension of Christ to the heavens after the resurrection, the coming of the Holy Spirit to the holy apostles, and how and where the disciples proclaimed piety toward Christ, and the miracles they worked through prayer and faith in Him. And about the divine calling of Paul that came from heaven, his apostleship and the flowering message, and, to put it briefly, about the many and great dangers that the apostles endured for the sake of Christ. 150 lines (στίχοι).

The summary of Acts mentions three specific events: The ascension of Christ, the coming of the Holy Spirit and the conversion of Paul. The summary does therefore not intend to give a survey of the contents of the book since it does not refer explicitly to any event after Acts 9. One may assume that the three events referred to were considered the most important in the book. In the summary, Paul is clearly considered an apostle. The summary also mentions the proclamation of the disciples, the miracles they worked, and the dangers they endured. The reference to the miracles of the apostles differs from the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, where there is no mention of the wonders. The Prologue to Acts ends with a stichometric note. The term στίχος here obviously refers to space-lines: (1) There is no evidence that the Euthalian prefatory matter was arranged in separate sense-lines, and (2) the counting is only useful if it is space-lines that are counted. 3.4.5. Prologue to Acts: Summary The structure of the Prologue to Acts is basically similar to that of the other two Euthalian prologues. A problem for the analysis of the structure is the long ‘Encomium of Melete’ that may be a later addition to the text. The heading of this prologue may use the term πράξεις with a special meaning, referring to the collection of Acts and the Catholic letters, since the prologue also mentions the Catholic letters as a part of the volume. Thus, the status of the Prologue to the Catholic Letters is uncertain. Possibly, it was only the Prologue to Acts that was prefixed to the volume that contained Acts and the Catholic letters. The prologue sheds some light not only on the second Euthalian volume, but also on the first on Paul. It goes into more detail regarding one of the objectives of the work, to make the biblical text easier to read by dividing it up into small units. It is, however, difficult to imagine how this was achieved, since the surviving manuscripts may represent a later form of arranging the text. As is the case with the Prologue to the Catholic Letters, this prologue is also dominated by the modesty topos. It contains very little that is of interest to the reader of Acts. The short ‘Epitome of Acts’ could only be illuminating for the reader who had almost no knowledge of the contents of that book.

3.5. The Prologues: Summary All scholars have assumed that the three Euthalian prologues are the work of a single author. Even if the commentary above has not offered conclusive evidence against this assumption, there is a tension between the texts that is worth summing up. The use of the genre. A striking difference between the Prologue to the Letters of Paul and the two other prologues is that only in the first prologue is there a reasonable balance between the prologus praeter rem and the prologus ante rem. In the Prologue to Acts and the Prologue to the Catholic Letters, the prologus praeter rem tends to dominate. This change in style was noted by von Soden, who used it as a basis for his reconstruction of

Commentary on the Prologues

227

the life of Euthalius: The older Euthalius was anxious to give thanks to his superiors who had made him bishop of Sulci. But instead of this biographical interpretation, one may see in these differences a different use of the genre: The two later prologues put so great an emphasis on the prologus praeter rem that one gets the impression that the high-sounding language has become an end in itself, the prologue has become a work of art that has liberated itself from the original subject matter. This phenomenon is known from Greek literature. In her study of the letters of Theodoret, Monica Wagner draws attention to the genre προλαλιά. These are rhetorical showpieces written in a conversational style that precede the speech, some of them having survived as independent compositions.363 This is a possible literary context for the two later Euthalian prologues, which have so little to say on the biblical text. Their primary function may be to please the reader with a highly sophisticated language, not to convey information. The description of the editions. If the three prologues are the work of one hand, one might assume that the editions of the Pauline letters, Acts and the Catholic letters were basically similar in the way the biblical text was presented. But the reading of the Euthalian prologues leaves some doubt regarding the supposed similarities between the editions. (a) The Prologue to the Letters of Paul. The ‘Editorial Notice’ in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul mentions the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the μαρτυρίαι. In connection with these, two meta-terms occur, ἔκθεσις (of the chapter titles) εὕρεσις (of the testimonies). The third task, the most accurate division of the reading (ἡ τῶν ἀναγνώσεων ἀκριβεστάτη τομή) possibly refers to the division of the text into sense-lines, as Robinson believed. The other possibility is that it refers to the division of the text into lections. The conclusion is that whether we choose this interpretation or the other, an element commonly assumed to be a part of the Euthalian apparatus must be left out: Either the sense-lines or the lections. (b) The Prologue to the Catholic Letters. Similarly, the Prologue to the Catholic Letters has an incomplete description of the edition, if we presuppose that the edition contained all the elements in the comprehensive Euthalian manuscripts (such as min. 181). In the Prologue to the Catholic Letters, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the μαρτυρίαι are again mentioned, along with the meta-term ἔκθεσις. Ἔκθεσις is here used not only of the chapter titles but also of the testimonies. The most interesting feature is the fact that the lections are not mentioned at all. In this prologue, the sense-lines are referred by the term στιχηδόν. (c) The Prologue to Acts. In this prologue, a description of the former edition is also included. This description uses other terms than those in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul. Especially noteworthy is the term στιχηδόν that is used with reference to the sense-lines. It is remarkable that this important term only occurs in the Prologue to Acts and the Prologue to the Catholic Letters. As for the description of the edition of Acts, its vagueness has been noted. It is not possible to know what the author referred to by πως ἀνακεφαλαιώσασθαι. The ‘Editorial Notice’ uses again the term στιχηδόν. Another new expression occurs here: the reading of the text κατὰ προσῳδίαν. A new edition of the apparatus may shed more light on these problems. Possibly the lections are mentioned in other manuscripts of the Prologue to the Catholic Letters than those used for our printed editions. At the present stage, however, the lections seem to be 363 See M. Wagner 1948: 145.

228

Commentary

the most uncertain element. If the interpretation of Robinson is adopted, the lections are not mentioned in any of the Euthalian prologues. The differences in terminology, especially the absence of στιχηδόν and κατὰ προσῳδίαν in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, give an impression of diversity. The idea of progress. The idea of progress (αὔξησις, προσαύξησις, προκοπή) plays a major part both in the Prologue to the Pauline Letters and the Prologue to Acts. But the kind of progress treated in the two prologues is quite different. In the Prologue to the Pauline Letters, especially in the ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters’ the progress is related to ethics: The behavior of the communities improves throughout the letter collection. The Pauline letters are described as a manual describing how one should act (πολλὰ περὶ τῶν πρακτέων τοῖς ἀνθρώποις). In the Prologue to Acts, on the other hand, the progress is related to meditation on Scripture where the objective is to make progress in learning (ὅσῳ γὰρ ἄν τις ἐν ἕξει, καὶ γνώσει, πλειόνων γίγνεται μαθημάτων, τρὶς τόσον μειζόνων, καὶ σπουδαιοτέρων ὀρέγεσθαι πέφυκεν). This difference may be related to the observation made by von Dobschütz, that the monastic life of the author comes to the fore only in the Prologue to Acts. It is only in this prologue that we learn that the author is surrounded by fathers and brothers who may correct him and help him. In this environment, the meditation on Scripture becomes more important. These differences also give an impression of diversity. The possibility that the Euthalian prologues are not the work of one hand should therefore be considered.

Part Four Résumé

IV. Résumé 1. Introduction The present commentary has been devoted to the Euthalian apparatus, a corpus of auxiliary texts that summarize the apostolic writings of the New Testament. The apparatus is divided into three main genres: Chapter titles (κεφάλαια-τίτλοι), hypotheses, (ὑποθέσεις), and prologues (πρόλογοι). These three genres divided the present commentary into three main parts. This division does not correspond to any particular manuscript but is justified because the different genres may represent independent traditions that later were combined. The name ‘Euthalius’ has become the name of the shadowy figure who is supposed to have edited the apparatus on the basis of separate traditions. The name appears, however, only in a small number of manuscripts. The original independence of the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is attested by statements in the Euthalian prologes. The ὑποθέσεις have also been circulating independently of the apparatus. This is attested by the Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae (of unknown date). The apparatus also includes other genres, such as lists of biblical quotations and lections. These texts offer little information that is not contained in the biblical texts and were therefore not the focus of the present commentary. The work of Euthalius also included the division of the text into sense-units so that the text could be easily understood when read aloud. This aspect of the work is very difficult to describe today since the medieval manuscripts use punctuation. Euthalius, on the other hand, probably arranged the biblical texts in sense-lines (as in the ‘Euthalian’ Codex H). The original language of the Euthalian apparatus was Greek, and the apparatus is attested in a great number of medieval Greek manuscripts. Practically all of these manuscripts also contain the biblical text. It also exists in Syriac, Armenian and Georgian. Parts of the apparatus exist in Slavonic, Gothic and Latin but whether the entire apparatus once existed in these languages is altogether uncertain. The apparatus thus may be said to belong to the Eastern churches. Much ink has been spilled over the ‘Euthalian’ question. The starting point of this survey is Lorenzo Zacagni, prefect of the Vatican library, who in 1698 published the editio princeps of the apparatus. His work was summarized and further advanced by Jacob Wettstein in his edition of the New Testament. (1752). Research on Euthalius experienced its golden age in the last decade of the 19th century and the first decade of the 20th. In 1895, James Armitage Robinson published his Euthaliana, and this study was the starting point of a lively discussion among scholars such as James Rendel Harris, Fredrick Cornwallis Conybeare and Ernst von Dobschütz. In 1902, Hermann von Soden included the Euthalian apparatus in his edition of New Testament. Later, relatively few works on Euthalius appeared, the most important from the middle of the 20th century is a contribution by Günther Zuntz (1945), although his main concern was not Euthalius but the history of the Syriac NT. In 1970, -PVJT
$IBSMFT
8JMMBSE
ĕOJTIFE
IJT
:BMF
EJTTFSUBUJPO
PO
UIF
BQQB-

232

Résumé

ratus where previous work of Euthalius was surveyed and carefully evaluated. Nils Dahl, who had been his advisor, returned to Euthalian studies in the year 2000. Almost everything that has been written on the apparatus shows a strong interest in isagogic questions: ‘Who was Euthalius?’ ‘Where and when did he live?’ ‘Which elements were included in the original edition?’ The answers to these questions exhibit a great diversity. Euthalius has been imagined as living in Alexandria, in Pselcha in Upper Egypt, in Antioch, and, finally, on the island of Sardinia. The dates vary from the 4th to the 7th centuries. von Soden even tried to write a biographical sketch of Euthalius which bears almost novel-like qualities. In the eyes of von Soden, Euthalius is a tragic figure who was seduced to sign a heretical confession, he was ‘ein schwacher Geist’ and also ‘ein Opfer seiner Zeit’. This aspect of the work of von Soden on Euthalius has unfortunately overshadowed its merits. It should be remembered that von Soden offers a rich selection of auxiliary materials that he and his co-workers found in the manuscripts. Among them was the Greek text of the so-called ‘Prayer of Euthalius’, which previously had been known only in the Syriac and Armenian versions. The isagogic questions pertaining to Euthalius should not be neglected in future studies. It should however been said that a new edition of the Euthalian text is needed before substantial progress can be made in this area. Scholars have for the most part been relying on Zacagni’s text from 1698, which is the foundation of all later editions, including von Soden’s text, which was translated for the present commentary.

2. Aim of the Present Commentary While previous scholarship on Euthalius has focused on isagogic questions, the present commentary focuses on the apparatus itself and its relation to the New Testament text. A key term is ‘pre-text’, which refers to the text that is reworked in the ‘meta-text’. The pretext in this case is the NT letters and Acts; the meta-text is the Euthalian apparatus. The presupposition of the present commentary is that the pre-text and the meta-text should be studied together. Not only can the apparatus shed light on the biblical text (its original intention), but the biblical text can also shed some light on the apparatus. This is what the present commentary is trying to achieve. By studying the relationship between the two levels, it is possible to describe some of the methods that were used when the apparatus was composed. The aim of the commentary was therefore not to write a commentary on the apparatus in isolation, but always to have the entire ‘system’ of pre-text and meta-texts in mind. Three aspects should be mentioned in particular: (1) The ancient commentator could, just as the modern, refer to a text by quoting it, either in full or only its opening words. In this case, the pre-text is used as meta-text. It stands, as the logician Quine puts it, as a hieroglyph for itself. (2) A far more interesting method is to replace the pre-text with something else, a meta-communicative term (meta-term), such as ‘prayer’ or ‘command’. This is a method that is often employed in the Euthalian apparatus. The choice of these terms may reveal how the ancient commentator understood the pre-text. This aspect of the apparatus was examined in a study by Hellholm and myself (2004) on the term ‘paraenesis’ in the apparatus. In the present study, all the central meta-terms were included. (3) Another common technique found in commentaries both ancient and modern, is the paraphrase of the pre-text. In the case of the Euthalian apparatus, the paraphrase is

The Meta-terminology of the Euthalian Apparatus

233

almost always shorter than the pre-text. A common method is to combine (2) and (3) and thus let a meta-communicative term introduce a short paraphrase of the pre-text. The reader who has access to both the biblical text and the apparatus will probably get an impression that is quite different from the reader who uses only the biblical text. It was not the aim of the present commentary to give a complete interpretation of the entire Euthalian ‘system’ (biblical texts + auxiliary materials) but rather to point to some important motifs in this ‘system’. Of particular interest here is the ‘Paulusbild’, i.e. the image of Paul in the various sections of the apparatus. Paul is undoubtedly the most important figure in the context of the apparatus, being viewed as the author of all fourteen letters (including Heb) and one of the main characters of the one narrative text, Acts. The apparatus frequently refers to him simply as ‘the Apostle’.

3. The Meta-terminology of the Euthalian Apparatus Much space was given in the present commentary on the meta-terminology of the apparatus. The most important discoveries were related to three important meta-terms; ‘prayer’, ‘thanksgiving’ and ‘paraenesis’: Prayer (εὐχή, προσευχή). The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι designate fourteen texts in the letters as prayers. The word preferred in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is εὐχή, a word that is used in the NT in this sense only in Jas 5:15. A comparison of the use of εὐχή in the κεφάλαιατίτλοι gave an interesting glimpse into the study of the ancient commentator: In several instances, the pre-text used the optative mood with God or Christ as subject. If the optative mood was not used, the pre-text itself had a form of the meta-communicative verb προσεύχομαι (εὔχομαι). Only one instance, the designation of +VE
o
BT
ϣЯϳф
XBT
more difficult to explain. Here, the pre-text may have been misunderstood, or, possibly, the meta-term ‘doxology’ (which also is used) may be the motivation for introducing the related meta-term ‘prayer’. This pattern was not repeated in the ὑποθέσεις: Here, we find a related designation only once, in the paraphrase of 2 Thess 3:16, which the ὑπόθεσις renders ‘and now, having prayed (ἐπευξάμενος) for peace on their behalf ’. When we turn to the Euthalian prologues, we find that there is no reference to ‘prayer’ in the biblical texts. Instead, the prologues themselves contain prayers for the author and his work. This diversity indicates that the methods used in the separate traditions in the apparatus were quite different. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι use a method that we would expect for a Christian grammarian; showing an awareness on word-forms and meta-communicative verbs in the pre-text and using them as a basis for the meta-term that he creates. The ὑποθέσεις and the prologues do not follow this path, and have in general little to say on prayers in the pre-texts. Thanksgiving (εὐχαριστία). The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι designate nine texts in the letters and one in Acts as εὐχαριστία. Most of the material corresponds to the thanksgiving sections of the letters, which regularly open with the verb εὐχαριστῶ. The benediction in 2 Cor o
JT
BMTP
EFTDSJCFE
BT
ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰцϟ
JO
UIF
Ϩϣϲрϩϟϧϟϰцϰϩϭϧ
ćJT
DPSSFTQPOET
UP
UIF
opinion of modern scholars who consider the benediction in Jewish letters an equivalent of the Greek thanksgiving. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι thus seem to treat the thanksgivings in the pre-texts in a similar way to their treatment of prayers: The meta-communicative verb εὐχαριστέω is the marker that justifies the use of the meta-term εὐχαριστία. This does not

234

Résumé

mean that there is a complete correspondence between pre-text and meta-text, where every instance of the verb in the pre-text would be reflected by the noun in the κεφάλαιατίτλοι. Some of the thanksgivings in the pre-texts (e.g., Rom, 1 Cor) are simply referred to as the προοίμιον, and in one instance (1 Thess), the opening thanksgiving section is described as ἔπαινος ‘praise’. In the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Philemon, ἔπαινος and εὐχαριστία appear together. When we turn to the ὑποθέσεις, we find quite a different picture. Here, the thanksgiving sections of the letters are generally not referred to as thanksgivings (e.g., by the verb εὐχαριστέω) but described by other verbs, such as ἀποδέχομαι ‘praise’ (Rom, 2 Cor, Phil, 2 Thess, 2 Joh, 3 Joh) or μαρτυρέω (1 Cor). Unexpectedly, the ὑποθέσεις use the verb εὐχαριστέω with reference to 5JU
o
BOE
UIF
OPVO
ϣЯϳϟϮϧϯϰцϟ
XJUI
SFGFSFODF
to 2 Cor 13:13. Neither of these would be classified as ‘thanksgivings’ by modern scholars. The method used in the ὑποθέσεις is thus different from that of the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. The ὑποθέσεις seem to pay more attention to the impact that the thanksgivings have on the recipients of the letter. This aspect is certainly not neglected by the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι (cf. their use of ἔπαινος), but it is clearly highlighted in the ὑποθέσεις. When we turn to the πρόλογοι, we find that the thanksgivings in the biblical texts are not referred to explicitly. Possibly, the opening thanksgiving section in 1 Thess is referred to as ἔπαινος ‘praise’, when the ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters’ (included in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul) says ὧν ἡ μὲν ἔπαινον περιέχει αὐτῶν εὐπειθείας ἐκ προσαυξήσεως, ἄχρι καὶ θλίψεων πεῖραν ἐσχηκότων, ‘one of them containing praise of their obedience on account of their progress, even unto the test of persecution.’ If this is the case, this passage in the pre-text is described by the same meta-term as in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. Paraenesis (παραίνεσις). This part of the present commentary was based on an earlier study by Hellholm and myself: The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι use παραίνεσις (in singular or plural) for fourteen pre-texts, three of these in Acts. The use of the term for moral exhortation in the epistolary texts seems to correspond well with the use of the term in biblical scholarship of the 20th century. This correspondence between the ancient and the modern views is particularly clear in 
ćFTT
o
DG
Martin Dibelius) and in 1IJM
o
(cf. Ernst Lohmeyer). It should be noted that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι sometimes use this meta-term in a different sense. This is found especially in the list for Acts: It is used with reference to the words of James to Paul concerning circumcision (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XXXI) and also with reference to the speech Paul gave on the ship before the shipwreck off Malta (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XXXVIII, second ὑποδιαίρεσις). In the ὑποθέσεις, we find that corresponding meta-terms (παραινέω/παραινετικοὶ λόγοι) are used frequently, both in the the ὑποθέσεις to the Pauline and the Catholic letters (Rom, 1 Cor, Gal, Eph, $PM
o
ćFTT

5JN
5JU
o
1FU
o
+PI 
"MTP
IFSF
UIF
UFSNT
SFGFS
UP
NPSBM
FYIPStation. The frequent use of the prepositional phrase εἰς τὰ ἤθη in this context, indicates this. It is, however, in the ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters’ (included in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul), that the most remarkable use of the term is found. Here the entire Pauline collection is characterized as παραινέσεις ὑπέρ τε βίου καὶ ἀρετῆς. The metaterm παραίνεσις (and its cognates) is thus important in all three genres (κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, ὑποθέσεις, πρόλογοι) of the apparatus. The present commentary on the meta-terms of the apparatus has confirmed the views of previous scholarship that the apparatus is the application of Greek paideia on the Apostolic writings. The new insight is that the Greek learning has been applied in rather dif-

The ‘Paulusbild’

235

ferent ways: The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι use meta-terms from the religious sphere frequently to describe the biblical writings. This is not the case with the other two genres, the ὑποθέσεις and the πρόλογοι. Thus, the study of meta-terms confirms the views of earlier scholars that the apparatus is made up of originally independent traditions. It is most interesting to note that the three genres of the apparatus converge when it comes to the meta-term παραίνεσις, a term that does not belong especially to the language of religion. In this study, the relationship between the meta-terminology in the Euthalian tradition and linguistic phenomena in the pre-text has been a main focus. In future studies of the Euthalian traditions, it will be possible to move beyond this, and explore the rhetorical structures behind the meta-terminology. The importance of this aspect was brought to my attention by Dieter Sänger, who used the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Galatians as an example: Here, the first κεφάλαιον-τίτλος clearly uses διήγησις as a rhetorical term. The argumentatio
PG
UIF
MFUUFS
CFHJOT
XJUI
UIF
GPVSUI
Ϩϣϲрϩϟϧϭϫ
o


BOE
JU
JT
NPTU
interesting to note that the argumentatio is represented in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι as a series of ὅτι-clauses. The exhortatio section corresponds to the eleventh κεφάλαιον, and here we again find a meta-term in its κεφάλαιον-τίτλος (ὑπογραφή). The peroratio
o
JT
the twelfth κεφάλαιον with the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος ‘warning against those who drag men to circumcision, and encouragement to a new life under the spirit.’ Here, Sänger observes that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι show acquaintance with the rhetorical rule that one should sum up the most important points of the speech in the end. This kind of rhetorical analysis will give us a more complete understanding of the hermeneutical relevance of the Euthalian traditions. The Euthalian material serves to guide the interpretation of the biblical texts by those reading it. I hope to return to this aspect in a future study.

4. The ‘Paulusbild’ The ‘Paulusbild’ of the Euthalian apparatus is closely associated with the meta-terminology of the apparatus. Through this terminology, the apparatus describes in many different ways what Paul does in his letters. In addition to the meta-terms, the apparatus also contain a great amount of paraphrase of the biblical writings that highlight different aspects of the ‘Paulusbild’. In the following summary, the ‘Paulusbild’ is treated under five different headings so that the reader may more easily perceive the great diversity of the apparatus. The pre-Christian Paul. This theme is not explicitly referred to in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts mention only ‘the Jews’ as accusers of Stephen and are silent about Paul’s role in this context (κεφάλαια-τίτλοι Acts VIII and IX). Interestingly, the Damascus event is not described as a conversion but only as a ‘call to apostleship’ (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XIII). Neither do the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the letters refer to Paul as a former persecutor of the Church. The κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Gal I does not mention his persecution of the Church (as the pre-text Gal 1:13 and 23) but only his renunciation of Judaism. Similarly, the passage about the pre-Christian Paul who persecuted the Church in 1IJM
o
JT
OPU
QBSBQISBTFE
JO
UIF
Ϩϣϲрϩϟϧϟϰцϰϩϭϧ
PG
UIBU
MFUUFS
ćF
QJDUVSF
EPFT
OPU
change when we turn to the ὑποθέσεις. In the ὑποθέσεις of Acts, Galatians and Philippians, where we might have expected it, there is no mention of Paul the persecutor. The ὑπόθεσις of Acts refers to the ‘election’ of Paul and not to his former life. The ‘Epitome of

236

Résumé

the Pauline Letters’ (included in Prologue to the Letters of Paul) is similar to the κεφάλαιατίτλοι and the ὑποθέσεις with regard to the pre-Christian Paul. In this short summary of the letters, there are no references to his past. The ‘Epitome of Acts’ (included in the Prologue to Acts) also focuses on his calling and on what happened after it. In the ‘Life of Paul’ (included in the Prologue of the Letters of Paul), on the other hand, there is a significant difference. Here, the persecution of Paul is highlighted to such a degree that it goes far beyond the pre-texts. Here, Paul is not only present when Stephen is killed, he is also the brain behind the deed, as he uses ‘the hands of all to kill’. The ambition of Paul the persecutor goes so far as to send the Christians into ‘the pit of perdition’. This hyperbolic language was noted by N. A. Dahl in his study of Euthalius. The present commentary has demonstrated that the apparatus with regard to this shows a strange diversity: The majority of the texts included in the apparatus paint a static and harmonized picture of Paul the Apostle as one who acts according to God’s will at all times. This picture is of course well suited for a paraenetic purpose. The ‘Life of Paul’ chooses instead to emphasize the contrast between the furious pre-Christian Saul and the later Apostle. Paul the Apostle. In the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Pauline letters, the word ‘apostle’ occurs only once, in a general heading for all the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Pauline letters: ‘Survey of the general chapters of every letter of the Apostle Paul…’. The occurrence of the title only in the heading is worth noting, especially since the relationship between the heading and the lists of κεφάλαια-τίτλοι is not quite clear. The heading may be secondary, as often is the case, and the use of the title in the heading may be evidence of this. It seems in any case clear that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Pauline letters do not count Paul’s apostleship among the main themes of his letters, even if modern interpreters might maintain this view, e.g., with regard to Galatians or 2 Corinthians. The picture is slightly different in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts. In the pre-text, Acts, Paul is rarely referred to as an apostle (only in Acts 14:4 and 14). Still, κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XIII refers to the Damascus event as a ‘call to apostleship’. The κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Acts XXI also picks up the term from the pre-text (Acts 14:4): ‘How the apostles were persecuted in Iconium…’, one of the two instances in Acts where the title is used of Paul. Its occurrence exactly here, in this κεφάλαιον-τίτλος, is evidence of how closely the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts are modeled after the pre-text. The result is that the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts refer to Paul’s status as an apostle more frequently than the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of the Pauline letters. This is puzzling if we consider the pre-texts, where Paul’s apostleship is primarily emphasized in the letters and not in Acts. In the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters, on the other hand, the title ‘apostle’ is used frequently. Here, ‘the Apostle’ is used frequently by itself as a substitution for ‘Paul’. This usage is also found in the ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters. The ὑπόθεσις of 2 Pet makes Peter say to everyone that they should love ‘the writings of the Apostle’, seemingly reserving this title only for Paul. The idea can hardly be that Peter was not an apostle. Still, this mode of expression is evidence of the strong emphasis on Paul as an apostle that is found in the ὑποθέσεις of the letters. The fact that the title is used so frequently does not mean that Paul’s apostleship is considered a main theme in the letters, since Paul’s defense for his apostleship is not paraphrased. The ὑπόθεσις of Acts refers to the Twelve as apostles. Paul seems, however, not to be reckoned among the apostles, since the ὑπόθεσις of Acts refers to his ‘election’ but does not use the title ‘apostle’ when referring to him. This shows that the language of the ὑποθέσεις is not uniform regarding the descrip-

The ‘Paulusbild’

237

tion of Paul’s status. A greater uniformity is found in the Euthalian prologues. In all main parts of the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, Paul is referred to as ‘Paul the Apostle’ or the ‘Apostle’. The ‘Epitome of Acts’ (included in the Prologue to Acts) speaks of Paul’s apostleship following the Damascus event. Thus, the designation ‘Apostle’ for Paul is found in all the three main genres of the apparatus but not all the genres use this title with the same frequency. There is also a variation within texts that represent the same genre. Paul and the Law. This central theme is treated in all three genres of the apparatus and is instructive to throw light on its great diversity. In general, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι do not present a tendentious picture of the Jews and the Law. The Law is not necessary for salvation (e.g., κεφάλαια-τίτλοι Gal IV and X), and Paul is said to have warned against those who drag men to circumcision (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Gal XII). This theme is in general treated with a firm basis in the pre-text. The most negative and misleading statement about the Jews is found in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 2 Thess II, which says that Anti-christ in the end will be sent especially against the Jews. This statement, which has no clear basis in the pre-text, seems to stand isolated in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. Especially interesting is the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Romans with regard to questions related to the Law. The κεφάλαιοντίτλος Rom III transforms Paul’s question τί τὸ περισσὸν τοῦ Ἰουδαίου into the phrase περὶ ὑπεροχῆς Ἰσραήλ ‘about the superiority of Israel’. The formulation of the κεφάλαιοντίτλος is worth noting, since it emphasizes the positive answer to the rhetorical question. The most extensive text in the Pauline corpus on the relationship between the Church and Israel, 3PN
o
JT
GBJUIGVMMZ
SFQSPEVDFE
o
JG
XF
UBLF
UIF
MJNJUBUJPOT
PG
UIF
HFOSF
κεφάλαιον-τίτλος into account. One should admire the skill which manages to reproduce so much of Paul’s thought in a few words. The κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Rom XVI gives the following paraphrase of Romans 11: ‘About the plan, according to which they were rejected, so that they may return on a second occasion, in zeal of the Gentiles who had the privilege of being joined to the faithful Israel.’ This very precise formulations should be kept in mind in a comparison between the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the ὑποθέσεις. Here, the picture is changed and Paul’s polemic against the Law becomes the main theme. This was observed by N. A. Dahl in his study of the apparatus. Paul’s opponents are according to the ὑποθέσεις for the most part Judaizers. This is of course not completely without foundation in the pre-texts, but the ὑποθέσεις have radicalized Paul’s views. The ὑπόθεσις of Rom thus makes Paul say that not even the Jews need circumcision after the coming of Christ, and that circumcision now is to be abandoned by everyone. This is not what 1BVM
TBZT
o
FWFO
JG
POF
NBZ
VOEFSTUBOE
IPX
UIF
JEFB
DPVME
CF
EFWFMPQFE
PO
UIF
CBTJT
PG
Paul’s theology. The treatment of 3PN
o
NBZ
JMMVTUSBUF
UIJT
UFOEFODZ
UP
TJNQMJGZ
1BVMT
NFTTBHF
*O
UIF
аɀшϦϣϯϧ϶
PG
UIBU
MFUUFS
DIBQUFST
o
BSF
QBSBQISBTFE
BT
GPMMPXT
A"OE
now, as a good house-steward, he comforts on the one hand the Jews: ‘you do not become transgressors of the Law if you believe in Christ.’ On the other hand, he commands those from the Gentiles not to boast against Israel, but to understand that as branches upon the root, they were grafted onto them.’ This passage of the ὑπόθεσις is a balanced composition paraphrasing both words of comfort and warning directed against the two groups respectively. This impression of balance is, however, a creation of the ὑπόθεσις which has put together scraps of the pre-text (apparently Rom 9:31; 10:31 and 11:18). The pre-text (3PN
o
EPFT
OPU
IBWF
UIJT
TUSVDUVSF
CVU
IBT
JUT
GPDVT
PO
*TSBFM
BOE
JUT
SPMF
JO
UIF
IJTtory of salvation. In the use of the image of the olive tree, Paul even suggests that God may

238

Résumé

break the wild shoot (the Gentile Christians) off and graft the natural branches (the Jews) in again (o 
ćJT
JEFB
IBT
CFFO
DPNQMFUFMZ
MPTU
JO
UIF
аɀшϦϣϯϧ϶
QSPCBCMZ
CFDBVTF
it is difficult to make it congruent with the polemics of the ὑποθέσεις against the Law. Here, the difference between the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the more tendentious ὑποθέσεις is clearly visible. A difference with regard to accuracy was noted by L. Ch. Willard in his dissertation with regard to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the ὑπόθεσις of Eph. Here, Willard perceived that the ὑπόθεσις, though longer, was less thorough in its description of the letter than the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of that letter. Willard says that he did not attempt to support this observation by studying all of the relevant materials. The present commentary on the apparatus has added new material that support Willard’s observation. The most striking inaccuracy of the ὑποθέσεις may be their simplistic summaries of Paul’s view on the Law and circumcision. The third treatment of the theme ‘Paul and the Law’ that should be mentioned here is the one found in the ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters’ (included in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul). In this text, the Pauline corpus is treated on the basis of the strange presupposition that the letters were ordered according to the progress of the addressees. The communities are apparently divided into three groups (Romans, Corinthians, Galatians/Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians/Thessalonians-Hebrews). This structure allows different themes to be treated at several levels, and the ‘Epitome’ draws vertical lines, as it were, between different communities. Thus, the theme of Judaism and adherence to the Law is met first in Gal, at the lowest level according to the ‘Epitome’, where the addressees are said to have defected to Judaism. At the second level, we meet the theme again, as the Colossians are warned both against the deceptions of philosophy and against Jewish observances. The fact that they need a warning places them above the Galatians: They are more steadfast and have not abandoned their faith. Interestingly, the Hebrews appear (by necessity, as the final community letter) at the highest level. The recipients of this letter learns from Paul about ‘Jewish mysteries’ and their translation to Christ. The ‘Epitome’ thus makes the most advanced readers receive instruction about the Jewish tradition and its meaning. The modern reader of the apparatus may note how different this description is from the ὑποθέσεις, which use another language (especially ‘the shadow’) to speak of Old Testament motives. Thus, when viewed together, the genres of the apparatus again give an impression of diversity regarding its treatment of this theme. Paul and his opponents. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι do not offer much information about Paul’s opponents. This can be explained on the basis of the pre-texts, which the κεφάλαιατίτλοι follow closely. The opponents of Paul in Galatia ‘drag men to circumcision’ (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Gal XII), and those in Colossae are associated with a ‘deceitful human philosophy’. In the treatment of the Pastoral epistles, the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι emphasize that the threat from heresy lies in the future, as κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 1 Tim VII, ‘demonic heresies’. The passage on the deceivers in 
5JN
o
JT
MBCFMFE
B
AQSFEJDUJPO
ćF
аɀϭϦтϯϣϧ϶
have more to say on Paul’s opponents. This is mainly found in their prophasis section, where the background of each letter is explained. It is significant that the ὑποθέσεις put great emphasis on the Judaizers. The term appears in the ὑπόθεσις of 1 Tim but the opponents of Paul at Philippi and Colossae were, according to the ὑποθέσεις, of the same kind. Both the Corinthian letters are associated with Judaists. The opponents who caused the divisions that Paul referred to in 1 Cor were allegedly the same people as his opponents in 2 Cor, people who made the Corinthians ‘sit down beside the letter of the Law’ (ὑπόθεσις

The ‘Paulusbild’

239

of 2 Cor). Interestingly, other aspects of Paul’s opponents seem to be unimportant in the ὑποθέσεις. The ὑπόθεσις of 1 Cor refers to the deception concerning the resurrection in Corinth, but no attempt is made to explain how this theme was related to the activity of the Judaists. The opponents of Paul in Colossae tried to deceive the Colossians with ‘Greek sophisms, directed against faith in Christ, concerning food permitted in the Law and circumcision’ (ὑπόθεσις of Col). Thus, the Greek ‘sophisms’ are closely associated with the favorite theme of the ὑποθέσεις and are not treated as expressions of a ‘philosophy’. The emphasis on the Judaizers is felt also in the ὑποθέσεις of the Pastoral epistles (see the prophasis sections of the ὑποθέσεις of 1 Tim and Tit). In the ὑπόθεσις of 2 Tim, one of the few references in the ὑποθέσεις to another kind of heresy is found: Hymenaeus and Philetus said that ‘the resurrection has already taken place’ (cf. 2 Tim 2:18). The ὑποθέσεις of the Pastoral letters emphasize the problems that lie in the future: Paul warns Timothy, ‘as he should know that there will be times when some will renounce the faith’ (ὑπόθεσις of 1 Tim, cf. the reference to the ‘last days’ in the ὑπόθεσις of 2 Tim). When we turn to the Euthalian prologues, we find the only treatment of this theme in the ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters’. The opponents of Paul here seem to recede into the background. The entire collection of Pauline letters is described as ‘paraeneses’, and Paul is, according to the ‘Epitome’ mainly concerned about how men should act. The focus is thus on the praise and the blame that Paul gives his addressees: Thus, the problem at Corinth is not the opponents (which are not mentioned by the ‘Epitome’) but that the Corinthians ‘did not behave worthy of their faith’. Similarly, Paul’s opponents in Galatia are passed over in silence and the ‘Epitome’ states that the Galatians had defected to Judaism. The most detailed description of the threat from heresy in the ‘Epitome’ is found in the summary of Colossians, who received warnings both against ‘the deceptions of philosophy’ and ‘Jewish observances’ (apparently viewed as two different and separate subjects). In its summary of 2 Tim, the ‘Epitome’ refers to Paul’s prediction of the rise of the heretics, just as the other genres of the Euthalian apparatus do. The general impression is, however, that the three main genres of the apparatus treat this theme in different ways: The characteristic feature of the ὑποθέσεις is the identification of almost all of Paul’s opponents as Judaists, while this idea is not found in the two other main genres of the apparatus. Paul the Martyr. An interest in the martyrdom of Paul is found in all the three main genres of the apparatus although this interest finds different expressions. The κεφάλαιατίτλοι refers to the theme where it occurs in the pre-texts but does not give it additional space. Thus, the final words in 2 Tim are referred to briefly as ‘About his coming death to eternal glory’ (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος 2 Tim IX). The ὑπόθεσις is more explicit with regard to this and paraphrases the same text as ‘having […] announced that the time of his death is close at hand and that he will be offered and die as a martyr’ (μαρτυρεῖν). The strongest interest in the martyrdom of Paul is found in the Prologue of the Letters of Paul. This prologue includes the ‘Life of Paul’, where the final sections are devoted to his martyrdom. Here, Paul is said to have received ‘the crown of the holy and victorious martyrs of Christ’, and the ‘Life’ even concludes by telling how ‘the Romans’ celebrate his martyrdom on 29 June. This note probably was the pre-text of the ‘Martyrdom of Paul’, one of the short texts that are transmitted with the apparatus. The Prologue of the Letters of Paul returns to this theme in the following ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters’, where more space is given to 2 Tim than to any other Pauline letter. The third main part of the prologue, the

240

Résumé

‘Chronicle of the Preaching of Paul’ (which is mainly based on Eusebius) shows the same strong interest in Paul the martyr, and brings three quotations from the end of 2 Tim. The ‘Chronicle’ ends with an apologetic section that explains why Luke did not include Paul’s martyrdom. The most important conclusion regarding the ‘Paulusbild’ in the Euthalian apparatus is that it shows a great diversity. The differences are not only between texts that belong to different genres; there are also differences within texts that belong to the same genre. This diversity exists at all levels. Some of the texts, especially the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, can only be characterized as patchworks, and the ‘Paulusbild’ of each part (e.g., the ‘Life’ and the ‘Epitome’) may be studied separately. This has consequences for the possibility of placing the apparatus in a particular theological milieu, as Willard suggested as a task for scholars in the future. If some of the idiosyncratic interpretations of the apparatus may be found in a patristic author, one may possibly establish a link between the Euthalian piece in question and that author, but one should not draw any conclusions regarding the apparatus as a whole. This insight is not new in Euthalian scholarship, but the present commentary has offered substantial evidence that confirms it.

5. The Catholic Letters in the Euthalian Apparatus The Catholic letters are treated in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the ὑποθέσεις. The κεφάλαιατίτλοι do not seem to venture far beyond the pre-text. In one instance we find new information, namely the identification of the Mount of Transfiguration as Tabor (κεφάλαιοντίτλος 2 Pet II). This is found to be a well-known tradition, probably based on an interpretation of Ps 88:13 (LXX). The ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters show more examples of a rather free paraphrase that may say something quite different from the pre-text. This is found e.g. in the ὑπόθεσις of Jud, which states that ‘Michael the archangel could not bear (ὑπήνεγκε) the blasphemy of the devil’, a transformation of the difficult phrase οὐκ ἐτόλμησεν κρίσιν ἐπενεγκεῖν in the pre-text (Jud 1:9), which probably means that Michael did not dare to accuse the devil but left the matter to God. Thus Michael is used as an example of showing restraint against adversaries. This rather difficult thought has been replaced by the condemnation of blasphemy, which is easier to understand. It is worth noting that this ὑπόθεσις presents the new idea in a language that closely resembles the pre-text, the most important change being the use of ὑπενεγκεῖν instead of ἐπενεγκεῖν. On a few occasions the ὑπόθεσις may use a language that clearly has another source: The ὑπόθεσις of 1 Joh says that John ‘explains that the mystery that has come to us is not something new’ (μὴ νεώτερον εἶναι τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς μυστήριον). This phrase is also found in the ὑπόθεσις of 2 Joh and in the ὑπόθεσις of Eph, where it may belong, as it looks like a paraphrase of &QI
o The Euthalian apparatus has not much to say on the authors and circumstances of the Catholic letters. This may be explained on the basis of the pre-texts. The letters of Peter are clearly considered works by the apostle both in the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the ὑποθέσεις. The ὑπόθεσις of 1 Joh identifies the author as ‘he who wrote the gospel’ and does not introduce another person named John. There is no mention of the fifth Johannine writing, the Apocalypse, but it is difficult to say if this has any significance. As for the addressees, we find a few short statements. The ὑποθέσεις of Jas and 1 Pet understand

Acts in the Euthalian Apparatus

241

the prescripts of these letters literally and takes the ‘Diaspora’ as a reference to the Jewish origin of the addressees. The ὑπόθεσις 1 Pet even states that the addressees needed to be strengthened because they were of Jewish origin. In this we may see a repetition of a similar tendency in the ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters. A most interesting difference between the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the ὑποθέσεις is found in their respective paraphrases of Jas. The teaching found in this letter on the relationships between justification, works and faith has presented a problem for the interpreters. Some find in this letter a view opposed to that of Paul, others find that Jas merely tries to correct a misunderstanding of Pauline theology. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι offer a paraphrase of +BT
o
UIBU
JT
WFSZ
DMFBS
BOE
BMTP
EJďDVMU
UP
IBSNPOJ[F
XJUI
1BVM
AćBU
POF
OPU
by faith alone, but also by works, not by one of them separately, but by both together, is justified.’ (κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Jas IV). This may not be a very tendentious interpretation (cf. 2:24) but it is worth noting that there are also some ideas in the passage (o
that the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος does not mention. The κεφάλαιον-τίτλος does not include the idea that the faith of Abraham was made complete through works (ἐκ τῶν ἔργων ἡ πίστις ἐτελειώθη, 2:22), which would have been easier to harmonize with the Pauline view. In the κεφάλαιον-τίτλος, there is no mention of any organic connection between faith and works: They are treated separately, as two necessary components in the process of justification. When we consider the ὑπόθεσις of Jas, we find that the pair faith/works has been omitted and that the ὑπόθεσις instead emphasizes the opposition between hearers and doers of the law (which correspond to the opposition between hearer and doers of the word in the pre-text, 1:22). More importantly, the ὑπόθεσις makes James say that ‘one should show faith not only in word, but also in deed’ (καὶ οὐ λόγῳ μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἔργῳ δεῖ δεικνύναι τὴν πίστιν). The expression πίστιν δεικνύναι seems to be borrowed from the pre-text (κἀγώ σοι δείξω ἐκ τῶν ἔργων μου τὴν πίστιν, 2:18). The ὑπόθεσις has however replaced the phrase ἐκ τῶν ἔργων with ἔργῳ. The conclusion is that the κεφάλαιατίτλοι and the ὑπόθεσις have treated this problem differently. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι present a pointed text that is difficult to harmonize with Paul since faith and works apparently are placed on the same level, as equally necessary for justification. The ὑπόθεσις proceeds in the opposite direction and has combined 1:22 and 2:18 into a statement that can more easily be harmonized with Pauline theology: One should show faith both in word and deed.

6. Acts in the Euthalian Apparatus Acts is given a less thorough treatment in the apparatus than we would expect. The most detailed paraphrase is found in the long list of κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. This list seems to be based on a careful reading of Acts and contains very few errors. An apparent misunderstanding is the reference to Philip in Acts 8 as the ‘apostle’, but the text may possibly use the term in a wider sense. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι also seem to forget that Paul according to Acts spoke to the Ephesian elders in Miletus and not in Ephesus. This error occurs in a ὑποδιαίρεσις-τίτλος and may be secondary. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι in Acts pay attention to the major themes of the pre-text, such as the coming of the Spirit, the preaching and the miraculous healings of the apostles, the outpouring of the Spirit on the gentiles, and the conflicts with the Jews leading to the arrest and process against Paul. Throughout the list,

242

Résumé

the geographical movements of the characters are carefully noted. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts are in some manuscripts attributed to Pamphilus of Caesarea. Even if this attribution is doubtful, one may say that it reflects a recognition of the high standard of this list. When we turn to the ὑπόθεσις of Acts, we find that this text lies on the opposite end of the spectrum. This text is a very short summary of Acts. It mentions the Ascension of Christ, the coming of the Spirit, the appointing of Matthias and of the deacons, and the election of Paul. The remainder of Acts is summarized simply as ‘what he went through, and, finally, his voyage to Rome.’ This very unsatisfactory ὑπόθεσις was apparently expanded by two lists; one of apostles and deacons and another of the wonders (σημεῖα) in Acts. The ὑπόθεσις of Acts includes the traditions about Luke known from Eusebius, that he was an Antiochene and a physician. A similar short treatment of Acts is the ‘Epitome of Acts’ (included in the Prologue to Acts). This text includes the same traditions about Luke as the ὑπόθεσις, and the summary of Acts is also very similar. Only three specific events are referred to: The Ascension of Christ, the coming of the Spirit, and the conversion of Paul. The other themes of the work, such as the miraculous healings and the persecution of the apostles are referred to only in general statements. Finally, Acts was also one of the pre-texts of the ‘Life of Paul’ and the ‘Chronicle of the Preaching of Paul’, both included in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul. In both texts we find that the story of Paul in Acts has been used together with material from the letters and extra-canonical traditions. Neither of these two texts attempt to give any complete paraphrase of Acts, since they are only interested in one of its characters. The ‘Life’ is very selective in its summary, mentioning only one visit of Paul to Jerusalem before his final journey and focusing on the conversion of Paul and on his death as a martyr. The ‘Chronicle’ is also selective since its main interest is to date the events on the basis of Eusebius’ Chronikon.

7. The Composition of the Euthalian Editions A strong interest in the secondary literature on the apparatus has been to determine which of its elements were original, i.e., belonged to the editions to which the prologues were prefixed. Scholars have had a range of different views on the subject. At one end of the spectrum stands J. Armitage Robinson, who made the words in the Euthalian prologues a criterion of authenticity. Only components explicitly mentioned there could, according to Robinson, be considered original. At the other end stands von Soden, who was willing to accept practically the complete apparatus as original. The differences between these two scholars regarding this correspond well with their different views on the date of the apparatus: Robinson has an early date (4th cent.) for Euthalius and a ‘minimalist’ view of the contents of the apparatus, while von Soden places him late (in the 7th cent.) and includes the maximum of the material found in the manuscripts. The present commentary has not focused on these questions, since a new edition of the apparatus is needed. At the present stage of research only conjectures can be made. One may in fact ask the question whether ‘Euthalius’ and the uniformity of the editions is evidence of a later construction. Some observations made by earlier scholars show that this possibility at least should be considered: (1) von Dobschütz pointed out that there are indications of a change between the first prologue (to the Pauline edition) and the two later ones (to

The Composition of the Euthalian Editions

243

Acts and to the Catholic letters): Only in the two later ones do we get the impression that the author is in a monastic environment, since he only there asks brothers and fathers to pray for him. (2) Another important change is the stylistic one, a change which von Soden paid special attention to in his study. The two later prologues are composed in a high-sounding language loaded with self-deprecating phrases that the first prologue employs in a more moderate way. One may say that the two later prologues have more form than content. The so-called Prologue to the Catholic Letters is a striking example, as it does not offer one word on the contents of these letters. This change in style may of course be explained on the basis of the biography of Euthalius, as von Soden tried to do. (3) An interesting link between the ‘Epitome of the Pauline Letters’ and the Prologue to Acts is that both have ‘progress’ as a central theme. But the theme is developed in two different ways: The ‘Epitome’ concentrates on the progress on the communities and this progress is perceived in their behavior. The Prologue to Acts, on the other hand, treats the individual progress of the student of scripture. The constant reading and meditating upon the biblical text will in the end lead to the contemplation of eternity itself. (4) There are also some strange differences in the ‘Editorial notices’ (contained in the prologues) that describe the Euthalian editions: It is only the Prologue to Acts that says that the author read the biblical text kata prosodian, and von Soden pointed out that the Prologue to the Catholic Letters seems to forget the division of the text into lections (if the text in our printed editions is sound). The language used to describe the divisions also shows differences. The ‘Editorial Notice’ in the Prologue to the Letters of Paul speaks of the ‘division of the readings’, while the corresponding ‘Editorial Notice’ in the Prologue to Acts mentions the ‘mediocre divisions of our unlearned reading’. The interpretations of these phrases is quite uncertain. The shift in number is unexpected in this kind of technical language and one also feels that ‘reading/readings’ (anagnosis) here refers to quite different things, to the act of reading and to ‘lections’. — These differences cannot be considered evidence that the editions were not actually of the same kind but they nevertheless raise the suspicion that the vague phrases and terminology do not necessarily describe the same scribal processes. This complex of questions is made more difficult by the transmission of the apparatus. The vast majority of manuscripts are medieval minuscules that are separated from the original editions by several centuries. Besides, the only uncial manuscript from late antiquity that supposedly represents the Euthalian edition of Paul (Codex H) is not preserved in entirety. If the Prologue of Acts and the Prologue to the Catholic Letters are the work of a later hand (or hands) than the Prologue to the Letters of Paul, one may think that the Prologue of Acts was written in imitation of the earlier work, since this prologue explicitly refers to an earlier work on the Pauline letters. In this context, it should also be remembered that only the edition of Paul exists in a Syriac version. The close association between that edition and the edition of Acts and the Catholic letters is not found to be universal and may belong to a strand in the Greek tradition. In any case, the diversity in the descriptions of the edition contained in the ‘Editorial Notices’ comes as no surprise in view of the commentary on the ‘Paulusbild’ found in the apparatus.

244

Résumé

8. The Ancient and Medieval Parallel Materials in Relation to the Euthalian apparatus The present commentary has also included parallel materials, mainly exegetical literature from ancient, medieval and modern times. Four sources have especially been consulted: The so-called Marcionite prologues; the Canones of Priscillian, and the commentaries of Theodoret and Theophylact, which both include ὑποθέσεις. These were selected because they contain parallels to the Euthalian material with respect to genre, not because they were considered particularly relevant when it comes to placing ‘Euthalius’ in a theological milieu. The present commentary has confirmed the insights of previous scholars that the Euthalian material is so diverse in itself that it will be very difficult to place it in one specific environment. At the present stage of research, the comparison with material on the basis of genre therefore seemed to be more promising. For the purpose of comparison, the Canones of Prisicillian may be considered together with the Euthalian κεφάλαιατίτλοι, since their form at first glance seems quite similar to the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. Both consist of short, independent phrases that do not form a continuous text. The ‘Marcionite’ prologues, and the ὑποθέσεις of Theodoret and Theophylact, on the other hand, may be compared to the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις. They are all continuous texts that treat the contents of the pre-texts as well as the communicative situation. The Canones of Priscillian and the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. It has long been observed that the Canones of Priscillian is one of the few real parallels to the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι in the West. In his introduction to the New Testament, Jülicher described Priscillian as ‘eine Art Seitengänger zu Euthalius’ (see the edition revised by Fascher; Jülicher/Fascher 1931: 576), but points out that Priscillian did his work ‘aus dogmatischem Interesse’. Jülicher was clearly correct when he established this work of Priscillian as a parallel to the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι. We may also agree that the special interests of Priscillian are clearly visible in the Canones. There is a dualistic tendency in his dogmatics and an ascetic tendency in his ethics (Fontaine 1997: 452; Brennecke 1999: 599). These tendencies can be felt in his summaries of the Pauline teaching (see e.g., Can. III, IV, XXIX, XXXIII). If we turn to the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι, we may say that it is more difficult to find any special theological tendency in this material that is foreign to the pretexts. The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι seem to follow their pre-texts closely, and if they diverge from them, it is rather with respect to style (cf. how Rom 3:1, τί τὸ περισσὸν τοῦ Ἰουδαίου, has been rewritten as περὶ ὑπεροχῆς Ἰσραήλ in κεφάλαιον-τίτλος Rom III!). We should not exclude the possibility that the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι might represent a tendentious interpretation and possible distortion of the pre-texts, but this creative element seems rather to belong at the level of selection (e.g. by neglecting certain passages) and is therefore more difficult to grasp. If there is a hidden agenda, it seems that this agenda has been concealed with great skill. Jülicher observed that there is clearly a dogmatic interest in the Canones, and he seems to suggest that this is not the case in the corresponding κεφάλαιατίτλοι. These observations have been confirmed by the present study. There is however another difference between the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι and the Canones: The κεφάλαια-τίτλοι are clearly meta-texts in the sense that they are texts about texts. The Canones may also be called meta-texts, but their actual ‘pre-text’ seems rather to be the Pauline teaching itself, not different passages in his letters. This is suggested by the terminology of the Priscil-

The Ancient and Medieval Parallel Materials in Relation to the Euthalian apparatus

245

lian prologue, where the passages in the Pauline letters are referred to as testimonia, i.e., ‘testimonies’ of the Pauline teaching. The Canones thus search behind the Pauline text and present a series of statements that summarize the teachings of Paul. This seems to be the reason why the Canones do not include the rich meta-vocabulary of the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι (e.g., εὐχή, εὐχαριστία, παραίνεσις). Their primary object is not the text but the teaching, while the Euthalian κεφάλαια-τίτλοι has, one may say, this order reversed. The ‘Marcionite’ prologues and the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις. The old theory that these prologues originated in Marcionite circles has been attacked by Dahl (1978/2000). The conventional reference to these texts as ‘Marcionite’ has however been kept throughout the present study. Regardless of what one may think about their origin, the ‘Marcionite’ prologues go far in identifying Paul’s opponents as Judaists. The church at Rome had, according to these texts, been tempted by the ‘false apostles’ to adhere to the Law and circumcision. It is most interesting to note that with regard to this, the ‘Marcionite’ prologues are close to the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις, where also the anti-Judaistic ideas dominate. As has been noted earlier in the present Resume, the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις are more radical than Paul himself as they make Paul abolish circumcision even for Jewish Christians (ὑπόθεσις of Rom). In addition to this similarity in outlook, there is also an affinity with regard to genre and structure. The term ‘prologue’ used for the Marcionite set is unfortunate. In the present study, the designation ‘prologue’ has been used for texts that open the conversation between author and reader. This is not the case with these ‘Marcionite’ texts. I have however kept the genre-designation ‘prologue’ since it has been in use for a long time. A better designation would perhaps be ‘argumenta’ (ὑποθέσεις). Just as the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις, the ‘Marcionite’ texts were probably composed by the use of a ‘search formula’, a series of questions that will produce the essential information about the pre-text. The ὑποθέσεις of Theodoret and the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις. The 5th cent. ὑποθέσεις of Theodoret differ from the Euthalian ones as they are part of a commentary on the Pauline letters that have come down to us. They often refer to the commentary and assure the reader that the ideas will be clearer in the commentary than in the ὑπόθεσις. In contrast to the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις, Theodoret makes a serious attempt to place the Pauline letters within the framework of Paul’s biography. This is the case, e.g., in the ὑπόθεσις of Ephesians, where a large section is occupied by the theme ‘Paul in Ephesus’. The material is taken from Acts. The use of Acts throughout these ὑποθέσεις provides an interesting contrast to the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters, which never refer explicitly to Acts. Thus, in the work of Theodoret we see the methods of a biblical scholar who tries to bring harmony between the different apostolic writings, something that the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις as a rule do not attempt. Related to this ‘scholarly’ approach is Theodoret’s more detailed description of Paul’s opponents. Thus, according to Theodoret, Paul is in the letter to the Romans fighting against two enemies at the same time; the ordered ‘phalanx’ of the Jews, and the more undisciplined ‘gang’ of the heretics, made up of (proto-) Marcionites, Valentinians and Manichaeans. This creates a very interesting contrast to the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις, which never refer to heretical movements by name. In contrast to the ‘Marcionite’ prologues and the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις, the ὑποθέσεις of Theodoret are not dependent on any search formula and their structure is therefore more flexible.

246

Résumé

Thus, the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις share in fact more features with the ‘Marcionite’ prologues than with Theodoret. The ὑποθέσεις of Theophylact and the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις. The 11th cent. commentary of Theophylact on the New Testament (without the Apocalypse) has also been used in the present commentary as comparative material. This work is also related to the Euthalian apparatus, as the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις of the Catholic letters also appear here. The commentary of Theophylact also bears the κεφάλαια-τίτλοι of Acts, though in a shorter form. This demonstrates that the auxiliary material in the Greek tradition often has been recycled. This has the consequence that the question of authorship here becomes as complex as with the biblical books themselves. The main point of interest in the present Resume, is Theophylact’s ὑποθέσεις of the Pauline letters. These ὑποθέσεις are possibly medieval compositions, as they probably were written for Theophylact’s commentary. The content of these texts may confirm this: Here, we find an interest in describing the ancient cities where Paul’s churches were situated. Thus, Corinth is ‘flourishing with much wealth and wisdom’, and Ephesus was the home of the ‘most famous philosophers.’ These conventional images of the ancient cities are cleverly connected with the themes of the letters. The rich members of the church at Corinth are therefore ‘typical’ of the city. This kind of exegesis probably belongs to an age where knowledge about the environment Paul lived in is something one learned in school. This aspect of Theophylact’s ὑπόθεσις makes for an interesting contrast to the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις, which do not show this interest. Thus, when compared to various elements of the Euthalian apparatus, the parallel materials included in the present study offer both similarities and contrasts. The Euthalian ὑποθέσεις share the emphasis on the anti-Judaistic Paul with the ‘Marcionite’ prologues. The Greek sources, however, include some perspectives that the Euthalian ὑποθέσεις do not have, for example, the harmonization with Acts (Theodoret) and the ‘antiquarian’ interest in the Greco-Roman world (Theophylact).

9. Comparison of the Parallel Materials In this final section, I will briefly compare some features of the parallel materials that I find particularly interesting. Hopefully, it will be possible to return to this material in future studies. The ‘Paulusbild’. The parallel materials used in the present study is evidence of how the person of Paul was exalted in later exegetical literature. The most elegant way to express this reverence is to refer to Paul simply as ‘the Apostle’ (in contrast to Paul’s own use of the title without the article). This is used by all four of the sources. In the Latin material and in Theophylact, this title is not expanded with epithets, but in Theodoret we find these added to it: Paul is frequently called ‘the divine (θεῖος) Apostle’ or ‘the divinely inspired (θεσπέσιος) Apostle’. This reverence for the Apostle extends to his co-workers in all the sources except one: In the short ‘Marcionite’ prologues, mention of co-workers is not a regular feature, but Priscillian devotes some space to them (LIV and LXXVI), where the titles that Paul himself uses are repeated: Timothy is his ‘fellow worker’ and Epaphroditus his ‘fellow apostle’ and ‘fellow soldier’. In the Greek sources, however, the co-workers also are given epithets. Thus, Theodoret refers to Timothy as the ‘thriceblessed’ (τρισμακάριος) and Tychicus as the ‘admirable’ (θαυμάσιος). The interest in the

Comparison of the Parallel Materials

247

co-workers is strongest in Theophylact, who devotes much space in his ὑποθέσεις of the Pastorals to Paul’s co-workers and his role towards them. Here, there is an interesting discussion of the genre of the Pastorals, where the ὑπόθεσις of 1 Timothy answers the possible objection ‘why did Paul first entrust the care of communities to his disciples and afterwards write to educate them?’ For the excellent answer given by Theophylact, I refer the reader to the Appendix. In all four of the sources, however, it is Paul who is the center of interest, and three of the sources refer to him as an ‘Apostle of the gentiles’ (Priscillian, Canon LXXV; Theodoret and Theophylact both use this title in the ὑπόθεσις of Hebrews). Their interest in Paul’s biography varies. It has been noted that as far as the ὑποθέσεις are concerned, Theodoret pays more attention to Paul’s travels than the other three sources. The short ‘Marcionite’ prologues had no space for such material and its absence cannot really be considered to betray a lack of interest. The Canones of Priscillian include, in spite of their mainly dogmatic interest, some material related to Paul’s life: The Apostolic Council (oddly, assigned to Antioch, LXXV) and Paul’s past as a persecutor (LXXI). Interestingly, this reference to the pre-Christian Paul is in the same canon followed by a reference to his rapture to Paradise and the instruction he received there from Christ (sic). This juxtaposition serves to preserve the idealized image of Paul and the authorization of his letters. An idealized image may also be found in the two Greek sources. The ὑποθέσεις of Theodoret and Theophylact do not devote much space to Paul’s persecution of the church. Theodoret gives in his ὑπόθεσις of Galatians a catalogue of the terms of abuse that Paul uses of himself in the letters (including ‘persecutor’), saying that ‘they who read his letters know that.’ In their detailed commentary on the text of the letters (especially with regard to Galatians), the biographical material was of course included, but the ὑποθέσεις do not highlight it. In addition to Paul’s conversion, the most significant event of his life may be his death as a martyr. The ‘Marcionite’ prologues briefly allude to it, referring to Paul’s imprisonments in Ephesus and Rome. ‘Martyrdom’ is also mentioned as a theme in the ‘Marcionite’ prologue to 1 Timothy. Theodoret expresses an interest in Paul’s martyrdom by quoting Paul’s words on his imminent end, both in the ὑπόθεσις of Eph and in the ὑπόθεσις of 2 Tim. This theme is important also for Theophylact, who also brings the well-known quotation from 2 Tim (4.6; ὑπόθεσις of Heb). Theophylact also creates a division within the Pauline letter collection that is related to this theme, saying that all the letters of Paul are holy, but especially the ones written from prison (ὑπόθεσις of Col). The clearest difference between our sources lies in their description of Paul’s opponents. According to the ‘Marcionite’ prologues, the opponents are the ‘false apostles’. The significance of this phrase within the ‘Marcionite’ prologues have been much debated, and it has not been the aim of the present study to solve this problem. Here, we can only say that these apostles are associated with Judaistic teaching, although a ‘rhetoric of philosophy’ also appears as an opposing ideology (see the ‘Marcionite’ prologue on 1 Cor). When we turn to Theodoret, the picture is quite different. His language with regard to Paul’s opponents has already been referred to: Theodoret depicts them as protoValentinians, proto-Marcionites, and even as ‘Manichees’. Another aspect in Theodoret is the idea that Paul’s letters function polemically even for later generations. Thus, according to Theodoret, the Arians, provoked by the high Christology of the opening chapter of Hebrews, react by trying to expel the letter from the canon. In the latest source in our parallel material, Theophylact, we find that this aspect is less prominent. In his ὑποθέσεις,

248

Résumé

we encounter a less specific vocabulary. In his ὑπόθεσις of Galatians, Theophylact mentions the observances of the Galatians as Greek and Jewish, but only his verse-by-verse commentary explains to which traditions the different observances belong. The meta-terminology. The parallel material offers a variety of meta-terms. These have not been the focus of the present commentary. The ‘Marcionite’ prologues gives a good opportunity to observe how meta-terms function, since they are short and as a rule contain only one or two terms. These are most often meta-communicative verbs. Interestingly, the prologues that treat the first three communities in the collection (Galatians/ Corinthians/Romans) all depict Paul as one who calls them back (revoco) to the true faith. This presupposes that even the Romans had erred, something that is not altogether clear on the basis of the pre-text. The use of the same meta-communicative verb for Paul’s communication with these churches creates a sub-group in the collection. Similarly, Paul is said to ‘praise’ (conlaudo) three other communities (Thessalonians/ Laodiceans/Philippians). According to Dahl (1978/2000: 189) only two of the prologues deal with literary genre. 2 Cor is referred to as a letter of consolation (litterae consolatoriae) while Philemon is labeled as a private letter (litterae familiares). He considers this to be evidence of an expansion of the set: Originally, the text focused on the churches, not the letters. At a later stage, new prologues were added. This had an influence on how the entire set was read and transformed the prologues into meta-texts in a strict sense. That is why the nominal genre-designations occur only in these added prologues. This is a convincing argument. The Canones of Priscillian also use some meta-terms. These are all in the form of meta-communicative verbs. I have already suggested that the reason for this may be that the Canones have the teachings of Paul as their ‘pre-text’ and only use the letters as a medium. If this is the case, they are related to the hypothetical first edition of the ‘Marcionite’ prologues. The meta-terms that do occur are the ones that we would expect: Paul ‘commends’ (commendo LIV), he ‘commands’ (iubeo LVII), ‘orders’ (praecipio LVII), ‘gives thanks (gratias ago LX), ‘gives testimony’ (testimonium reddo, LXI), and ‘rebukes’ (exprobro, LXII). When we turn to the Greek parallel materials, we find a greater variety. Some of the long ὑποθέσεις of Theodoret contains a rich meta-vocabulary describing the different sections of the letter. The use of these terms is therefore much more specific than in the ‘Marcionite’ prologues and in the Canones. His ὑπόθεσις of Romans may serve as an example. The opening declares that Paul in this letter brings ‘various teaching of different kinds’ (ποικίλη καὶ παντοδαπὴ διδασκαλία). This general designation is followed by more specific ones: Paul ‘shows’ (δεικνύω), ‘proves guilty’ (ἐξελέγχω), ‘teaches’ (διδάσκω), ‘exhorts’ (παραινέω), and ‘encourages’ (προτρέπω). Theodoret however does not use this method throughout. In the long ὑπόθεσις on Ephesians, he is too much concerned with the biographical details and does not attempt to cover the subject matter of the letter in any detail. He uses only two nominal genre-designations at the end: The letter consists of two parts, he says, the teaching of the divine message (διδασκαλία τοῦ θείου κηρύγματος) and ethical exhortation (παραίνεσις ἠθική). We finally turn to the medieval ὑποθέσεις of Theophylact. These texts also express an admiration for the rhetorical element in the Pauline letters. The ὑπόθεσις of Romans even mentions the episode in Acts where Paul is referred to as ‘Hermes’ because of his excellence of speech. The use of meta-terms is however not consistent. The ὑποθέσεις of Romans and Ephesians do not contain any such designations of the pre-texts. The ὑπόθεσις of 1 Cor, however uses

Comparison of the Parallel Materials

249

‘correct’ (διορθέομαι) to characterize the entire letter, while Paul in the ὑπόθεσις of 2 Cor is said to apologize (ἀπολογέομαι), approve (ἀποδέχομαι) and praise (ἐπαινέω). The lack of consistency in the meta-terminology reflects the fact that the genre ὑπόθεσις is used with great freedom. Some of Theophylact’s ὑποθέσεις are rather general prefaces that may go far into other matters, such as the sayings of Jesus in the Gospels or general proverbs. Thus, in the ὑπόθεσις of 1 Cor, it is said that worldly wisdom is the mother of all evils for those who trust her in all things. In the use of proverbs, the ὑποθέσεις of Theophylact resemble the medieval prologue. The whole system of meta-terms in various commentators on Paul, both in the Greek and Latin tradition deserves to be studied more intensively. Within the framework of the present commentary, it has not been possible to give the parallel material a full treatment.

Part Five Appendices

V. Appendix I 1. ‘Marcionite’ Prologues [‘Marcionite’ Prologues of the Letters of Paul. Text in 4PVUFS

o> Ad Galatas Galatae sunt Graeci. Hi verbum veritatis primum ab apostolo acceperunt sed post descessum eius temptati sunt a falsis apostolis ut in lege et circumcisione verterentur. Hos apostolus revocat ad fidem ueritatis, scribens eis ab Epheso.

To the Galatians The Galatians are Greeks. First, they received the word of truth from the Apostle, but after he left, they were tempted by the false apostles to turn themselves to the Law and circumcision. The Apostle calls them back to belief in the truth, writing to them from Ephesus.

Ad Corinthios Corinthii sunt Achaei. Et hi similiter ab apostolis audierunt verbum veritatis, et subversi mulitfarie a falsis apostolis, quidam a philosophiae verbosa eloquentia, alii a secta legis Iudaicae inducti. Hos revocat apostolus ad veram et evangelicam sapientiam, scribens eis ab Epheso.

To the Corinthians The Corinthians are Achaeans. In a similar way, they also had heard the word of truth from the apostles, but they were in many ways subverted, some by a verbose rhetoric of philosophy, others led by the heresy of the Jewish Law. The Apostle calls them back to the true wisdom of the Gospel, writing to them from Ephesus.

Ad Romanos Romani sunt in parte Italiae. Hi praeventi a pseudapostolis, sub nomine domini nostri Iesu Christi in lege et prophetis erant inducti. Hos revocat apostolus ad veram et evangelicam fidem, scribens eis ab Athenis.

To the Romans The Romans are partly of Italian origin. They were reached first by the false apostles, and under the name of Jesus Christ they had been deceived by means of the Law and the prophets. The Apostle calls them back to the true faith of the Gospel, writing to them from Athens.

Ad Thessalonicenses Thessalonicenses sunt Macedones in Christo Iesu, qui accepto verbo veritatis perstiterunt in fide, etiam in persecutione civium suorum; praeterea nec receperunt ea quae

To the Thessalonians The Thessalonians are Macedonians in Christ Jesus, who, having received the word of truth, persisted in faith even in persecution from their own citizens. Be-

254

Appendix I

a falsis apostolis dicebantur. Hos conlaudat apostolus, scribens eis ab Athenis.

sides, they did not accept what the false apostles said. The Apostle praises them, writing to them from Athens.

Ad Laodicenses Laodicenses sunt Asiani. Hi accepto verbo veritatis perstiterunt in fide. Hos conlaudat apostolus, scirbens eis a Roma de carcere.

To the Laodiceans. The Laodiceans are Asians. Having received the word of truth, they persisted in faith. The Apostle praises them, writing to them from prison in Rome.

Ad Colosenses Colosenses et hi, sicut Laodicenses, sunt Asiani. Et ipsi praeventi erant a pseudapostolis, nec ad hos acessit ipse apostolus, sed et hos per epistulam recorrigit: audierant enim verbum ab Archippo, qui et ministerium in eos accepit. Ergo apostolus iam ligatus scribit eis ab Epheso.

To the Colossians The Colossians are also Asians, as the Laodiceans. Also they were first reached by the false apostles, and the Apostle did not come to them himself but he corrects even them through a letter, for they had heard the word from Archippus, who also received a ministry to them. Therefore, the Apostle, now in chains, writes to them from Ephesus.

Ad Philippenses Philipenses sunt Macedones. Hi accepto verbo veritatis perstiterunt in fide, nec receperunt falsos apostolos. Hos apostolus conlaudat, scribens eis a Roma de carcere.

To the Philippians The Philippians are Macedonians. Having received the word of truth they persisted in faith and did not receive the false apostles. The Apostle praises them, writing to them from prison in Rome.

Ad Philemonem To Philemon Philemoni familiares litteras facit pro One- To Philemon he writes a private letter on simo servo eius. Scribit autem ei a Roma behalf of Onesimus, his servant. He writes de carcere. to him from prison in Rome. Ad Corinthios II To the Corinthians II Post actam paenitentiam consolatorias After they had repented he writes a letter scribit eis a Troade, et conlaudans eos hor- of consolation to them from Troas, and, tatur ad meliora. praising them, he exhorts them to behave even better. Ad Thessalonicenses II Ad Thessalonicenses secundam scribit et notum facit eis de temporibus novissimis, et de adversarii detectione. Scribit ab Athenis.

To the Thessalonians II To the Thessalonians he writes a second letter and he makes things known about the last days and about the disclosure of the adversary. He writes from Athens.




255

Ad Timotheum I To Timothy I Timotheum instruit et docet de ordinatio- He instructs and teaches Timothy about ne episcopatus et diaconii et omnis eccle- rules pertaining to the office of bishops siasticae disciplinae. and deacons and to the entire discipline of the church. Ad Timotheum II Item Timotheo scribit de exhortatione martyrii et omnis regulae veritatis, et quid futurum sit temporibus novissimis, et de sua passione.

To Timothy II Likewise, he writes to Timothy about exhortation to martyrdom and to adhere to the entire rule of truth, and what will happen in the last days and about his suffering.

Ad Titum To Titus Titum commonefacit et instruit de consti- He reminds and instructs Titus about the tutione presbyterii, et de spiritali conversa- ordaining of the office of elders, about spirtione, et de hereticis vitandis, qui in scrip- itual conversation and about avoiding herturis Iudaicis credunt. etics, who believe in the Jewish writings.

2. Edition of Priscillian [Edition of Priscillian. Text in 4DIFQTT

o> Prologus Priscilliani in canones epistu- Prologue to the Canons of the Letters of larum Pauli apostoli. Paul by Priscillian Multis occupatus necessitatibus litteris tuis tardius respondi, carissime. Postulaveras enim, ut contra haereticorum versutam fallaciam firmissimum aliquod propugnaculum in divinis scripturis sagaci indagine reperirem, quod non tam prolixum vel fastidiosum esset quam concinnum ac venustum existeret, per quod velocius eorum prosterneretur inpudentia, qui obiecta sibi verissima testimonia in suum pravissimum sensum ea interpretari nituntur aut certe negent haec esse scripta. Ideoque contra eos tale aliquid excogitandum esse dicis, quod not versuta oratoris eloquentia turgescat vel lubricis dialecticae syllogismis involvatur, nam haec quibusdam maxima

Since I have been occupied with many duties I respond late to your letter, my dearest friend. For you demanded that I through a clever device should find a defense in the divine scriptures against the cunning deceit of the heretics, that should not be as verbose and burdensome as it should be elegant and graceful, something through which their impudence might be overthrown. They, who when confronted with the most true testimonies either labor to interpret them in their own most corrupt sense or even deny that these things are written. Therefore, you say that against them something should be invented that is not inflated with the eloquence of the

256

Appendix I

solent esse perfugia, sed tale sit vis, quod mera veritate effulgeat atque mira constet scripturarum auctoritate. Illa vero vitari debere quae sunt spiritali et innocuae fidei Christianae contraria atque inimica, quippe quae mundi existens sapientia ab apostolo sit stultitia nuncupata. Haec te saepissime audiens et alia his similia mihi scribente e re mihi visum est ipsas scripturas in medio positas idest quattuordecim epistolas beatissimi Pauli apostoli in earum textu sensus testimoniorum distinguere ipsisque testimoniis numeros ordinare, quosque numeros unicuique epistularum ab uno incipiens usque in finem quantitatis suae modum sequaciter atramento supernotare. Praeterea ex ipsis testimoniis quaedam verba decerpens canones iisdem concinnavi saporibus ipsorum testimoniorum constantes. Quibus canonibus epistularum titulos et ipsorum testimoniorum numeros subternotavi, ut ubi vel quotum quaeres testimonium, per eundem canonem cui haec subdita sunt facillime reperias. Ipsi autem canones proprios habent numeros mineo descriptos idest in quattuordecim epistulas canones nonaginta; quosque numeros in omnem textum scripturae convenientibus sibi testimoniis supernotatos invenies illic videlicet, unde unicuique canoni pauca verba necessaria esse videntur. Cur autem non omne testimonium possideat canon, sollerti studio animadverte, quia eadem testimonia ex multis versibus constant, canones autem ex paucis verbis eo quod semper ad respondendum pauca verba proferantur. Ideoque evenit, ut aliquorum testimoniorum principia tantum cum canone cui subdita sunt conveniant, aliorum autem medietas, nonnullorum vero finis, plerumque totum. Et idcirco duorum vel trium seu plurimorum canonum numerum in unum testimonium mineo supernotatum invenies, ut iam dixi, illic tamen

orator or wrapped up in the deceitful sylMPHJTNT
PG
EJBMFDUJDT
o
GPS
UP
UIFTF
UIJOHT
TPNF
QFPQMF
VTF
UP
UBLF
SFGVHF
o
CVU
JOstead you wish it to be such that it shines with the pure truth and stands firm with the wonderful authority of the scriptures. Those things, which are harmful and hostile to the spiritual and innocent Christian faith, should be avoided, especially because the Apostle refers to the wisdom of the world as foolishness. Listening to you, who most wisely wrote me this and other things similar to these, I decided that it is beneficial to place the scriptures in the center, that is, the fourteen letters of the most blessed Paul the Apostle, to distinguish the sense of the testimonies in their text, to number the testimonies themselves, and to write above, in black ink, the numbers in sequence, beginning with the number one for each letter and continuing to its end. Moreover, selecting some words from the testimonies themselves, I put together canons made up of the essence of the testimonies. Below the canons I noted the names of the letters and the numbers of the testimonies so that you easily, by means of the same canon below which they are noted, may know where and in what place of the sequence you will find a testimony. Even the canons have their own numbers, written in red ink, that is, ninety canons from the fourteen letters of Paul. These numbers you will find throughout the entire scriptural text, written above the corresponding testimonies, in those instances, of course, where a few words seem closely related to a given canon. But listen carefully to the reason why the entire testimony does not have a canon: Because the testimonies consist of many verses but the canons of few words, because few words are always uttered as a response. And for this reason, it happens that with regard to some of the testimonies, only their beginning corresponds to the




unde pauca verba unicuique videntur esse necessaria. Hoc enim me elaborasse volo intellegas, quo fideliter continentiam scriptuarum palam facerem nulli existens inimicus et ut errantium velocius, sicut postulasti, corrigerentur mentes. Vale in Christo!

257

canon below which they are noted, with regard to others, their middle section, and with regard to others, their ending. Often the entire testimony corresponds to the canon. And for this reason, you will find the number of two or three or more canons written in red above a testimony. As I have already said: In the instances where a few words seem closely related to a given canon. I want you to know that I have worked this out in order to faithfully make clear the contents of the scriptures, as I am no one’s enemy, and in order to more swiftly correct, as you demanded, the minds of those who have gone astray. Farewell in Christ!

I Deus verax est, spiritus quoque deus et deus saeculorum possidens inmortalitatem estque invisibilis lucem habitans inaccessibilem, rex etiam atque dominus, cuius est imago ac primogenitus Christus, in quo non invenitur ‘est et non’, sed ‘est’ tantummodo.

I God is true, God is also spirit and God of the ages, possessing immortality and dwelling in inaccessible light, king and lord, whose image and first-born is Christ, in whom ‘yes and no’ is not found, but only ‘yes’.

II Quaenam sint quae sibi dissona et inimi- II What are the things that exist as conca motu ac fructibus existant; est namque fused and hostile towards themselves natio prava, sed et perditio habens filium through their desire and its fruits: because proprium. it is an evil race; but also perdition has its own son. III Quia duo genera spirituum sunt, unum dei, alterum mundi ad errores.

III That there are two kinds of spirits, the one of God, the other of the world, leading to errors.

IV Quia duae sint sapientiae, una quidem dei, altera vero hominum vel carnis.

IV That there are two kinds of wisdom, the one belongs to God, but the other truly belongs to men or the flesh.

V Quia multi dicuntur dii et quorundam 7
ćBU
NBOZ
BSF
DBMMFE
HPET
o
GPS
TPNF
ventrem deum esse et spiritus aeris huius their god is their stomach, and the spirits atque potestates tenebrarum, sed et ele- of the air and the powers of darkness, but menta mundi. also the elements of the world.

258

Appendix I

VI Quia peccata vel daemones tenebrae VI That sins or demons are named ‘darksive opera tenebrarum ab apostolo nuncu- ness’ or the ‘works of darkness’ by the pentur. Apostle. VII Quia stultorum atque carnalium vel dubiorum sit crasse de divinitate sapere vel sentire.

VII That it belongs to the fools and to the carnal or the irresolute to have a coarse insight or understanding of the divine.

VIII Quia ex deo et in deo sint omnia, qui universa operatur, omnisque paternitas ab eo nominetur atque omnia condita sint per Christum.

VIII That all things are from God and in God, who brings forth everything, and that every family is named from him, and that all things were created through Christ.

IX Quia sapientia et gratia atque benedic- IX That wisdom, grace and blessing are tio dona spiritalia sint et quod invisibilia spiritual gifts and that the invisible things eius per ea quae facta sunt intellecta con- of him are clearly seen, being understood spiciuntur. by the things that are made. X Quia inscrutabilia sunt iudicia dei et in- X That the judgments of God are inscruvestigabiles viae eius; similiter et divitiae table and his ways unsearchable; so also Christi et multiformis sapientia. the riches of Christ and manifold wisdom. XI Quia quae videntur temporalia, quae XI That the things which are seen are temautem non videntur aeterna sunt, ideoque poral; but the things which are not seen qui in hac vita tantum sperantes sunt, mi- are eternal, and for this reason they who serabiliores esse omnibus hominibus. have hope only in this life are of all men the most miserable. XII Quia Christus similitudinem car- XII That Christ in his ministry put on the nis peccati sumpserit in ministerio, in likeness of sinful flesh; in him are the treaquo sunt thensauri sapientiae, qui fecit sures of wisdom, he who has made both utrumque unum et ascendens in altum one, and, ascending up on high, led captivcaptivam duxit captivitatem, quemque iam ity captive, he, whom the Apostle said that non secundum carnem nosse se dicebat he has not known after the flesh. apostolus. XIII That Christ in the flesh died for us, XIII Quia Christus in carne pro nobis mor- one and the same is God and man, mediatuus idem homo et deus, mediator dei et tor between God and men. hominum sit. XIV That Christ is the foundation of the XIV Quia fidei apostolicae fundamentum apostolic faith, he who is the cornerstone Christus sit, qui est lapis angularis et caput and our head, from which is the whole nostrum, ex quo omne corpus et in quo body, and in which all who believe the construuntur qui credunt evangelio. Gospel are built up together.




XV Quia sacramentum olim filiis hominum absconditum, nunc per apostolum sanctis manifestatum sit et quod Christus sapientia nuncupetur, quam nemo principum huius mundi cognovit.

259

XV That the mystery that once was hidden for the sons of men now has been revealed to the saints through the Apostle, and that Christ is called Wisdom, whom none of the rulers of this world knew.

XVI Quia Christus filius dei imago virtutis XVI That Christ, the Son of God, is the imac sapientia patris sit et quod in ipso pleni- age of the power of the Father and his wistudo divinitatis corporaliter habitet, solus dom, and that in him dwells the fullness nesciens in carne peccatum; omnis autem of the Godhead bodily, as he alone knew homo mendax. OP
TJO
JO
UIF
ĘFTI
o
CVU
FWFSZ
NBO
JT
B
MJBS XVII Quia homo Christus ab apostolo deus et dominus nominatus sit et quod non in divinitate sed ex semine David et ex muliere factus dicatur.

XVII That Christ the man is called God and lord by the Apostle, and that he is said to be made of the seed of David and of a woman.

XVIII Quia Christus pax nostra sit ideo- XVIII That Christ is our peace and thereque in cruce sua inimicitias solvens dele- fore, abolishing on his cross the enmities, vit quod adversum nos erat chirographum he blotted out the handwriting that was medio pariete destructo. against us, having broken down the middle wall. XIX Quia Christus non invitus, sed sua vo- XIX That Christ not unwillingly, but by his luntate in passione sua patris inpleverit vo- own will fulfilled the will of the Father in luntatem, humilians se usque ad mortem. his suffering, humbling himself unto death. XX Quia Hierusalem illa caelestis sit libera et quod nos secundum Isac promissiones deputemur in semine et quod caput ac plenitudo ecclesiae Christus sit.

XX That the heavenly Jerusalem is free, and that we according to the promises to Isaac are considered his offspring, and that Christ is the head and fullness of the church.

XXI Quia spiritus dei omnia scrutetur et XXI That the Spirit of God examines evnoverit etiam alta dei, quae spiritales tan- erything and knows also the deep things tummodo intellegant et loquantur omnia of God, which only the spiritual underiudicantes, ipsi a nemine iudicantur occur- TUBOE
BOE
TQFBL
BT
UIFZ
KVEHF
BMM
UIJOHT
o
suri Christo. they will attain Christ and are themselves judged by none. XXII Quia peccatum mortem afferat atque in servitutem animam redigat.

XXII That sin brings death and enslaves the soul.

260

Appendix I

XXIII Quia ignorantia tenebrae sint, scien- 99***
ćBU
JHOPSBODF
JT
EBSLOFTT
o
CVU
tia vero lux in domino, et utraque filios knowledge is light in the Lord, and both suos habent. have their own sons. XXIV Quia deus ante saecula sapientiam in sacramento absconditam ad gloriam nostram praedestinavit, eorum videlicet quos ante constitutionem mundi elegit.

XXIV That God before all time designed the wisdom hidden in a mystery for our glory, the glory of those, certainly, whom he elected before the foundation of the world.

XXV Quia gratiae dei sit atque miseri- XXV That it belongs to the grace of God cordiae, ut credant audientes et salventur and his mercy that they who hear believe credentes, obtunsio vero vel induratio de and that they who believe are saved; but peccato veniat non credentibus et quod that the dullness or hardness comes to the contra naturam insertae sint gentes gratiae unbelievers from sin, and that the Gentiles dei, quippe ex quo et per quem et in quo were grafted in contrary to nature through sint omnia. the grace of God, because from him and through him and in him are all things. XXVI Quia peccatum et mors per Adam in omnes homines venerit et regnaverit mors ab Adam usque ad Moysen.

XXVI That sin and death passed on to all men through Adam, and that death reigned from Adam to Moses.

XXVII Quia corrumpant mores bonos XXVII That the most evil speakings corconfabulationes pessimae et quod quae- rupts good manners and that investigastiones atque contentiones subvertant po- tions and contentions rather overthrow the tius quam aedificent audientes. hearers than build them up. XXVIII Quia peccandi cupiditas idest vo- 997***
ćBU
UIF
EFTJSF
UP
TJO
o
UIBU
JT
UIF
luntas carnis, quae ex consuetudine diu- will of the flesh, which because of long turna lex iam dicitur atque natura, sanctae IBCJU
OPX
JT
DBMMFE
MBX
BOE
OBUVSF
o
JT
BMadversa semper sit voluntati. ways against the holy will. XXIX Quia caro eiusque prudentia deo sit XXIX That flesh and its wisdom are hostile inimica et a deo atque ab omni bono sem- to God and that it always leads away from per absentet. God and from every benefit. XXX Quia per habitantem in nobis dei spi- XXX That our mortal bodies will be made ritum vivificentur mortalia corpora nostra. alive through the spirit of God that dwells in us. XXXI Quia novus homo interior sit, cuius XXXI That the new man is the inner man, caelestis imago est, quippe ad imaginem whose image is the heavenly, because it is dei formatus quique dei gratia et scientiae created in the image of God and is recrelumine reformatur et ut thensaurus in fic- ated through the grace of God and the light




tili vase consistens visceribus misericordiae et fidei atque caritatis induitur.

261

of knowledge and, as a treasure lying in an earthen vessel, it puts on tender mercies, faith and love.

XXXII Quia vetus homo exterior sit, qui XXXII That the old man is the outer man, corrumpitur et in quo corpus peccati de- which perishes and in which the body of struitur quique terrestris domus et vas fic- sin is destroyed, which is called an earthly tile ab apostolo nuncupatur. house and an earthen vessel by the Apostle.

XXXIII Quia sanctorum corpora dei sive spiritus sancti templa et Christi membra sint et ideo semper hostia viva et placens esse debeant atque ab omni opere carnis et a susurratione et vaniloquio ceterisque peccatis abstinere se debeant et ut virgines iuxta apostoli consilium sic permaneant.

XXXIII That the bodies of the saints are temples of God or of the holy spirit and members of Christ, and for this reason always a living sacrifice and should be pleasing and abstain from all the deeds of the flesh and from whispering and empty talk and from other sins and that virgins according to the judgment of the Apostle should remain so.

XXXIV Quia sancti carnem suam cum vi- XXXIV That the saints crucify the flesh tiis et concupiscentiis crucifigant glorian- with the affections and lusts, glorying in tes in cruce Christi, per quem mundo eiu- the cross of Christ, through whom they sque operibus mortui sunt. have died to the world and its deeds. XXXV Quia cum carnibus et vino aliqui abstineant, nec iudicari ab aliis debeant nec ipsi alios iudicare eo quod mundis omnia munda sint et quia esca et potus neminem commendat. Deus enim et hunc, inquit, et haec destruit.

XXXV That when some abstain from meat and wine, they should not be judged by others nor should they judge others themselves, because everything is pure to the pure, and food and drink do not recommend us to God. For God destroyed (sic) both of them.

XXXVI Quia vinum sit omnis causa luxu- XXXVI That wine is the cause of all excess riae et ideo abstinendum sit ab eo, quippe and therefore one should abstain from it, quod pro sola infirmitate et ipsud modico BT
IF
BMMPXT
JU
GPS
VTF
POMZ
GPS
JMMOFTT
o
BOE
uti indulgeat. even this moderately. XXXVII Quia per beatam voluntariam XXXVII That the just through their blessed paupertatem iusti radicem malorum om- voluntary poverty reject the root of all nium avaritiam respuant, contenti cotti- evils, avarice, and are content with daily diana exhibitione et tegumenti sufficientia sustenance and sufficient clothing offered per pietatem sibimet ministrata. them through piety.

262

Appendix I

XXXVIII Quia iustorum militia et arma et hostes et lucta vel pugna spiritalia sint, quorum conversatio in caelis est, unde et Christum dominum exspectant.

XXXVIII That the warfare and weapons, the enemies, and the fights and battles of the just are spiritual, and that their citizenship is in heaven, from where they also expect Christ the Lord.

XXXIX Quia opus doctoris lectio sit atque evangelii praedicatio, in quibus nocte ac die operabatur apostolus.

XXXIX That the work of a teacher is reading and preaching the gospel, with which the Apostle works night and day.

XL Quia psalmis hymnis et canticis spirita- XL That one should persist in psalms, libus atque orationibus insisti debeat, tam hymns, spiritual songs and prayers, just as pro invicem quam pro regibus atque omni- much for one another as for kings and all bus hominibus. humans. XLI Quia apostolus omnibus omnia factus sit, ut omnes lucrifaceret, per quod omnibus placuit; quem imitare oportet, ut sicut luminaria in conversatione sua luceant inter ceteros Christiani, quorum tale debet esse opus qualis et sermo.

XLI That the Apostle became everything to everybody in order to win all, through which he pleased all. And that they should follow him, that they with their behavior may shine as lights among other Christians whose deed should be as their word.

XLII Quia corpus ac sanguinem Christi, quod est magum pietatis sacramentum, manifestatum in carne, iustificatum in spiritu, si quis indigne sumpserit, corporis ipsius sanguinisque sit reus.

XLII That the body and blood of Christ, which is the great mystery of faith, has been revealed in flesh and justified in the spirit, if someone takes it unworthily, he shall be guilty of his body and blood.

XLIII Quia scientia ac fide et sanctitatis odore erant pleni tam apostolus quam illi quibus gratias referebat.

XLIII That both the Apostle and they to whom he gave thanks were full of knowledge and faith and a savor of holiness.

XLIV Quia per multimodam spiritus sancti gratiam, prout oportuit, dona spiritalia distributa sint sanctis ideoque debere unumquemque in quo vocatus est permanere et inferiores honorem evangelio cooperantibus dare.

XLIV That spiritual gifts are distributed to the saints according to necessity through the manifold grace of the holy spirit, and, therefore, everyone should stay in the calling, in which he was called and the inferior should give honor to those who work with them for the gospel.

XLV Quia episcopus inreprehensibilis esse XLV That a bishop should be blameless debeat omnisque clerus pacificus iuvenalia and every cleric should be a peacemaker, desideria fugiens, servans mandatum, pro- fleeing the lusts of youth, guarding what bans potiora, corripiens errantem, docens he has been entrusted, approving the betutilia; similiter senes et viduas esse debere. ter, rebuking the errant, teaching what is




263

beneficial; The old men and the widows should be likewise. XLVI Quia ecclesiastici non debeant ob XLVI That men of the church should not suam defensionem publica adire iudicia go to official courts for their defense but sed tantum ecclesiastica, nihilque inique only to ecclesiastic courts, that they should iudicare ac duorum vel trium testimonio not judge unjustly but prove the case with rem probare, quia sancti mundum et ange- the testimony of two or three, since saints los iudicabunt. will judge the world and angels. XLVII Quia firmiores in fide debeant in- XLVII That the strong in faith should feel firmioribus conpati considerantes se ipsos, compassion for the weaker, considering ne et ipsi temptentur. themselves, so that they may not be tempted as well. XLVIII Quia in ordinibus ecclesiae elegerit deus primo apostolos, secundo prophetas, tertio magistros.

XLVIII That God in the orders of the church has elected first apostles, next prophets, and third teachers.

IL Quia omne bonum eligendum sit et IL That every good thing should be chocunctis virtutibus fraterna caritas praefe- sen, and that brotherly love should be conrenda, redimendum tempus paxque et hu- sidered the highest of all virtues, that one militas a Christianis sectanda. should redeem the time, and that Christians should follow after peace and humility. L Quia vitandi sint, qui non secundum L That they who do not live according apostoli traditionem vivunt, sed suo po- to the tradition of the apostle, but rather tius ventri deserviunt; qui in novissimis TFSWF
UIFJS
PXO
CFMMZ
TIPVME
CF
BWPJEFE
o
temporibus deterrimi sunt futuri. they who in the last days will be the worst. LI Quia gravius delinquunt qui alios iudi- LI That they who judge others doing worse cant ipsi deteriora facientes, vel certe par- things themselves commit a more seriticipes peccantium sint hi qui peccantibus ous sin, and also that they who in any way quoquo modo consentiunt. have pleasure in them that sin are partakers with them. LII Quia vel fuerint vel futuri sint pseudo- LII That there have been and also will be apostoli et pseudoprophetae, per quos sec- false apostles and prophets, through which tae, et satanas se transfiguret in angelum heresies exist, and that Satan transforms lucis. himself into an angel of light. LIII Quia multi recesserint ab apostolis vaniloqui, per quos haereses exstiterint ad errores.

LIII That many senseless talkers have turned away from the apostles and that

264

Appendix I

through them heresies exist, leading to error. LIV Quia conmendet eos qui secum conla- LIV That he commends they who work borant in evangelio et omnes qui praesunt; with him in the gospel and they, who are quorum, ut ait, nomina in libro vitae sunt leaders, whose names, as he says, are writscripta. ten in the book of life. LV Quia non per legem sed per Christi fidem et confessionem salventur ac iustificentur credentes, servitutis iugo et sexuum diversitate carentes.

LV That the believers are not saved and justified by the Law but through faith in Christ and confession, being without the yoke of bondage and the difference between the sexes.

LVI Quia praecipiat plebi, ut potestatibus subiecti sint et ut suis manibus operentur, uxores filios servos et servi dominos diligant, et mulieres in ecclesia taceant nec docere praesumant.

LVI That he commands people to be subject to the ruling authorities and to work XJUI
UIFJS
IBOET
o
XJWFT
DIJMESFO
BOE
TFSWBOUT
o
BOE
UIBU
TFSWBOUT
TIPVME
MPWF
the masters, and that women should keep silent in the churches and not think that they can teach.

LVII Quia incontinentibus nubere iubeat LVII That he orders them who cannot et mulier per filiorum generationem sal- restrain themselves to marry and that a vanda sit. woman is saved through childbearing. LVIII Quia factis iustificentur credentes, LVIII That the believers are justified non tantum sermonibus; non enim in ser- through deeds, not only in words; for the mone est regnum dei, ait, sed in virtute. kingdom of God, is not in word but in power. LIX Quia caput viri sit Christus, vir autem mulieris et quia operteat sine ira et disceptatione semper orare et mulieres ornatas esse debere non monilibus sed conversatione.

LIX That the head of the man is Christ but the head of the woman is the man, and that it is necessary always to pray without anger or disagreement, and that women should be adorned not with necklaces but with their conduct.

LX Quia gratias agat apostolus his qui ad elemosynam prompti sunt, alios ad hoc opus exhortans.

LX That the Apostle gives thanks to them who are ready to bring alms, exhorting others to this work.

LXI Quia bonae vitae quorundam laico- LXI That the Apostle gives testimony to rum et fidei atque humanitati eorum testi- the good life, faith and kindness of some of




monium reddat apostolus, quod refecerint vel ipsum vel sanctorum pauperes.

265

the lay people because they have refreshed him or the poor among the saints.

LXII Quia exprobret quorundam avari- LXII That Paul rebukes some for their tiam Paulus dicens se ita evangelium pra- greed saying that he has preached the gosedicasse eis, ut eos non gravaret; debere pel to them in such a way that he should tamen altario deservientes inde vivere, ut not be burdensome to them, but, still, miles suis stipendiis. should they who tend the altar live from it, as a soldier lives by his wages. LXIII Quia cervices suas quidam pro apo- LXIII That some laid down their own necks stolo supposuerint, quibus gratias agit non for the Apostle, to whom he gives thanks, solum ipse sed et universae ecclesiae, quas and not only he, but all the churches that etiam in domibus propriis susceperunt. they have received in their own houses. LXIV Quia iustitiam dei, quae per Christum data est, ignorent hi qui iustitiam legis sectantur; inpossibile namque erat legi deservientibus sibi auferre peccata.

LXIV That they who follow after the righteousness of the Law are ignorant of the righteousness of God, which was given UISPVHI
$ISJTU
o
GPS
JU
XBT
JNQPTTJCMF
GPS
the Law to take away the sins of those who served it.

LXV Quia duas leges dicat esse apostolus, unam per Moysen quae carnalis est, aliam per fidem et gratiam Christi quae spiritalis est, illam quidem destruens quia non iustificat, hanc vero statuens quia salvat atque sanctificat.

LXV That the Apostle says that there BSF
UXP
MBXT
o
POF
HJWFO
UISPVHI
.PTFT
which is carnal, the other given through the faith and grace of Christ, which is TQJSJUVBM
o
BCPMJTIJOH
UIF
POF
CFDBVTF
JU
does not justify but upholding the second because it saves and sanctifies.

LXVI Quia in lege iudaica maledictum sit, LXVI That there is a curse in the Jewish law, de quo nos Christus liberat factus ipse ma- from which Christ makes us free, having ledictum. been made a curse himself. LXVII Quia per spiritalem cordis in Chri- LXVII That the Apostle through the spiristo circumcisionem propudiosam illam le- tual circumcision of the heart in Christ gis destruat apostolus. abolishes the shameless circumcision that is of the Law. LXVIII Quia quae in veteri testamento vel facta vel scripta sunt, in nostri figuram contigerint.

LXVIII That the things that happened or were written in the old covenant came in order to be an example for us.

LXIX Quia Abrahae fidem imitandam Iu- LXIX That the Apostle declares that the daeis ponat apostolus, adprobans non ex faith of Abraham should be imitated by

266

Appendix I

operibus legis sed ex operibus fidei iusti- Jews, giving his approval to them who ficari credentes, quos et Israhel dei nuncu- believe that they are justified not by the pat. works of the law but by the works of faith, whom he also calls the Israel of God. LXX Quia gentes de Iudaeorum casu non debeant gloriari; deus enim omnes homines vult salvos fieri, concludens omnia sub peccato, ut omnium misereatur; qui per Christum nos reconciliavit sibi; deus enim, inquit, erat in Christo mundum reconcilians sibi.

LXX That the Gentiles should not boast about the fall of the Jews; for God wants that all men be saved, confining everything under sin that he may have mercy on all, He who has reconciled us to Himself; for God, he says, was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself.

LXXI Quia cum se persecutorem eccle- LXXI That even if he accuses himself of siarum fuisse accuset et minimum apo- having been a persecutor of the churches stolorum esse dicat, raptum tamen usque and says that he is the least of the apostles, ad tertium caelum se confitetur, ubi sine still he confesses that he was caught up to dubio instructus est evangelio, quod non the third heaven, where he certainly was ab homine sed a Chisto per revelationem instructed in Gospel, because he says that spiritus doctum se esse dicit. he was not taught by a man but by Christ through the revelation of the Spirit. LXXII Quia dicat idem apostolus a deo se gratiam apostolatus accepisse et Christum in se loqui et operari et quia spiritu dei agantur qui filii dei sunt, heredes quidem dei, coheredes autem Christi.

LXXII That the Apostle also says that he received the grace of apostleship from God and that Christ speaks and works in him, and that they who are led by the Spirit of God are the sons of God, heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ.

LXXIII Quia ibi evangelium praedicaverit, ubi nullus apostolorum fuerat seque ad evangelizandum a Christo missum.

LXXIII That he has preached the gospel where none of the apostles had been, and that he was sent by Christ to preach the gospel.

LXXIV Qui nihil minus fecerit aliis apo- LXXIV That he has not done less than the stolis tam praedicatione quam signis; nam other apostles, both with regard to preachetsi inperitus sum, inquit, sermone sed ing and signs, for even if I am rude, he says, non scientia. it is in speech and not in knowledge. LXXV Quia gentium sit apostolus quibus et evangelium praedicat, et quod veniens Antiochiam reprehendit Petrum sibique dextras dederint Iacobus et Iohannes et Barnabae societatis.

LXXV That he is the Apostle of the Gentiles, to whom he also preaches the Gospel, and that coming to Antioch he rebuked Peter, and James and John gave the right hands of fellowship to himself and Barnabas.




267

LXXVI Quia collegam habuerit Timo- LXXVI That he had Timothy as his feltheum et Epaphroditum coapostolum low worker and Epaphroditus as his fellow atque conmilitonem aliosque adiutores apostle and fellow soldier and others as sive ministros. helpers or assistants. LXXVII Quia filios vocet eos quos verita- LXXVII That he calls sons those whom he tis scientia inbuebat, in quibus apostolicae instructed in the knowledge of truth. Havauctoritatis potestate usus de his quos ad ing used the apostolic authority against paenitentiam contristaverat gratulatur. some whom he made sorry to effect their repentance, he rejoices in them. LXXVIII Quia praedicare potius quam LXXVIII That he was sent by Christ to baptizare missus a Christo sit nosque in preach rather than to baptize, and that we baptismo Christo esse consepultos, ut filii in baptism were buried in Christ, that we, dei effecti in novitate vitae ambulemus, he- having been made sons of God, should redes quidem dei coheredes autem Christi. walk in newness of life, heirs of God and joint-heirs of Christ. LXXIX Quia ob peccatorum inmensitatem scelesti homines deterioribus traduntur passionibus et quia non sponte creatura subiecta sit et a Christi caritate neque alia creatura nos separet et evangelium creaturae sit praedicatum.

LXXIX That the wicked men, because of the immensity of sins, are abandoned to shameful passions, and that the creature was not made subject from choice and that another creature will not separate us from the love of Christ and that the Gospel was preached to the creature.

LXXX Quia ex parte scire et ex parte pro- LXXX That he said that he knows in part phetare et per speculum illa quae futura and that he prophesies in part and that sunt videre se dixerit, currens ad bravium he sees what will happen through a glass, supernae vocationis dei. running for the prize of the high calling of God. LXXXI Quia Christiani in passionibus LXXXI That Christians should rejoice in gaudere debeant, scientes donum dei esse their sufferings, knowing that it is the gift quod credunt; nam pro Christo pati aeter- PG
(PE
UIBU
UIFZ
CFMJFWF
o
GPS
TVČFSJOH
GPS
na merces erit. Christ will be an eternal reward. LXXXII Quia corpora sanctorum in illa generali resurrectione diversis meritorum claritatibus induenda sint, ubi iam caro et sanguis, idest ventris et libidinis opera non regnabunt.

LXXXII That the bodies of the saints in the general resurrection will put on the different glories of their merits, where flesh and CMPPE
o
UIBU
JT
UIF
XPSLT
PG
UIF
CFMMZ
BOE
PG
EFTJSF
o
OP
MPOHFS
XJMM
SFJHO

LXXXIII Quia primitiae resurrectionis Christus sit, deinde qui ipsius sunt, nunc

LXXXIII That Christ is of the first fruits of resurrection, then they who are His, now

268

Appendix I

ipse super omnem principatum et potesta- He himself sits above all principality and tem sedeat in patris dextera conlocatus. power, at the right hand of the Father.

LXXXIV Quia in corpore constitutos re- LXXXIV That he says that the dead to sin, surrexisse dicat in baptismo eos qui pec- having been made alive with Christ, have cato mortui convivificati sunt Christo et risen bodily in baptism and that they seek quaerunt quae sursum sunt, non quae su- those things which are above, not things per terram. on the earth. LXXXV Quia iudicium dei erit iusto iu- LXXXV That the judgment of God will dice Christo, ubi recipiet unusquisque be with Christ as the righteous judge, secundum opera sua, conscientia ratio- when everyone will receive according to nem etiam de cogitatione reddente, om- his deeds, and the conscience also giving niumque criminum rei dei iudicantis ex- account of their thought, accused of all perientur examen. crimes they will be examined by God the judge. LXXXVI Quia inhonorentur a deo qui non LXXXVI That they who do not honor God honorificant deum et relinquantur deside- will be dishonored by Him and abandoned riis suis gravius iudicandi. to their passions to receive a more severe judgment. LXXXVII Quia ante iudicii diem veniet fi- LXXXVII That before the day of judgment, lius peccati qui intellegitur antichristus. the son of sin will come, who is known as antichrist. LXXVIII Quia iudicium in fine mundi igne erit, quod et iram nominat; qui dies in adventu Iesu de caelis ut fur veniet in filios diffidentiae omnemque inpietatem.

LXXXVIII That the judgment in the end of the world will be in fire, which he also calls wrath; the day of the coming of the Lord will come as a thief to the sons of disobedience and all impiety.

LXXXIX Quia praesens mundi huius felicitas non solum ut brevis sed ut nociva et malitiosa spernenda est et quia sapientia eius stultitia sit, in quibus et nos aliquando conversati, inquit, sumus; novissimam vero destruendam mortem, cum iusti de his qui nunc eos tribulant vindictam a domino fuerint consecuti.

LXXXIX That the present happiness of this world should be rejected not only as fleeting but also as harmful and evil, and that its wisdom is foolishness, in these things we also once walked, he says; but last to be destroyed is death, when the just will have received recompense from the Lord regarding those who now trouble them.

XC Quia iusti cum deo patre et Christo re- XC That the just will reign with God the gnaturi in aeternum sint, ubi corpus cor- Father and Christ in eternity, when the ruptioni ultra subiectum non erit.

[Theodoret: Arguments of the Pauline Letters. Text in PG 82.]

269

body will no longer be subject to corruption.

3. Theodoret’s Arguments [Theodoret: Arguments of the Pauline Letters. Text in PG 82.] ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG

"o"

Argument [of Romans]

Ποικίλην μὲν καὶ παντοδαπὴν ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος διὰ τῶνδε τῶν γραμμάτων προσφέρει διδασακαλίαν. Ἅπας δὲ τῆς Ἐπιστολῆς ὁ σκοπός ἐστιν οὗτος. Τῆς θείας ἐνανθρωπήσεως τὸ μυστήριον, τοῖς μὲν εἰλικρινῶς πεπιστευκόσι σεπτόν ἐστι καὶ ἄγαν προσκυνητόν. Ἐναργῶς γὰρ ἡμᾶς τὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ διδάσκει φιλανθρωπίαν. Οἱ δέ γε τῆς ἀπιστίας τὴν ἀχλὺν περκείμενοι, καὶ τοῦ νοεροῦ φωτὸς τὴν αἴγλην μηδέπω δεξάμενοι, γελῶσιν ἃ μηδὲ τῶν ἀγγέλων οἱ δῆμοι πρὸς ἀξίαν ὑμνῆσαι δεδύνηνται. Καὶ τοῦτο σαφῶς ὁ θεσπέσιος Ἀπόστολος Κορινθίοις ἐπιστέλλων ἐδίδαξεν· »Ὁ λόγος γὰρ ὁ τοῦ σταυροῦ τοῖς μὲν ἀπολλυμένοις μωρία ἐστὶ, τοῖς δὲ σωζομένοις δύναμις θεοῦ ἐστι«. Τοῦτο τοίνυν τὸ σωτήριον κήρυγμα, Ῥωμαίοις γράφων, ἀναγκαῖον δείκνυσι, καὶ πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις, Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ Ἕλλησι, λυσιτελὲς καὶ σύμφερον. Οὗ δὴ χάριν πρὸ τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων, καὶ Ἕλληνας ἐξελέγχει, τὴν ἐντεθεῖσαν τῇ φύσει παρὰ τοῦ πεποιηκότος τῶν ἀγαθῶν καὶ τῶν ἐναντίων διάκρισιν ἄντικρυς διαφθείραντας, καὶ τῆς φύσεως παραβεβηκότας τοὺς νόμους· καὶ μέντοι καὶ Ἰουδαίους, ἔγγραφον μὲν θείων νόμων δεξαμένους διδασκαλίαν, ὄνησιν δὲ ἐντεῦθεν οὐ βουληθέντας λαβεῖν, ἀλλὰ μείζοσι τιμωρίας ὑπευθύνους γεγενημένους. Μετὰ ταῦτα λέγει τὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ Σωτῆρος ἡμῶν ἐπιφάνειαν, οὐκ ἐπὶ κρίσει καὶ τιμωρίᾳ τῶν παρανενομηκότων γεγενημένην, ἀλλὰ τῶν

Through this letter, the divine Apostle brings various teaching of different kinds. But the aim of the entire letter is this: The mystery of the divine incarnation is to be honored and worshipped by those who sincerely believe because, with great evidence, it shows us God’s love of mankind. But they, who are surrounded by the dark night of unbelief, having not yet received the light of reason, laugh at such things that even the angelic nations have not been able to praise properly in their hymns. And this the divinely inspired Apostle made clear to the Corinthians when he wrote: ‘For the preaching of the cross is foolishness to them that perish; but unto them that are saved it is the power of God.’ Therefore, when writing to the Romans, he shows that the message of salvation is necessary, and that it is profitable and useful for all humans, for Jews as well as for Greeks. Therefore, first of all he proves the Greeks guilty: They openly destroy the natural inborn power to discern good and evil that comes from the creator and they have transgressed the natural laws. But also the Jews o
BMUIPVHI
UIFZ
IBE
SFDFJWFE
UIF
UFBDIJOH
of the divine laws in written form, they did not wish to receive profit from it but became subject to still greater punishments. After this, he speaks about the coming of our God and Savior, that it happened not for judgment and punishment of the transgressors of the law, but that it gave forgive-

270

Appendix I

ἁμαρτημάτων δωρουμένην τὴν ἄφεσιν, καὶ τοῦ θανάτου τὴν λύσιν ὑπισχνουμένην, καὶ τὴν αἰώνιον ἐπαγγελλομένην ζωήν. Ἐπειδὴ δὲ καὶ Ἰουδαίους ᾔδει λίαν ἀντεχομένους τοῦ νόμου, καὶ τοὺς τὰ Μαρκίωνος καὶ Βαλεντίνου νοσοῦντας, καὶ μέντοι καὶ Μανιχαίους, λίαν τούτου κατηγοροῦντας, καθάπερ ἄριστός τις στρατηγὸς πάντοθεν ὑπὸ πολεμίων κυκλούμενος, καὶ τούτους βάλλει κἀκείνους, καὶ τὸ τρόπαιον ἵστησιν· οὕτως ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος καὶ τῶν αἱρετικῶν τὸ στίφος, καὶ τῶν Ἰουδαίων τὴν φάλαγγα διὰ τῆς θείας κατέλυσε χάριτος. Τί γὰρ ποιεῖ; οὔτε ἄγαν ἐπαίρει τὸν νόμον διὰ τὴν Ἰουδαίων ἀναίδειαν, οὔτε πρόφασιν κατηρογίας παρέχει τοῖς δυσσεβέσιν αἱρετικοῖς. Ἀλλὰ δείκνυσι μὲν αὐτὸν τὸ δέον παιδεύσαντα, καὶ τὴν τῆς δικαιοσύνης διδασκαλίαν προσενεγκόντα· κατορθῶσαι δὲ ταύτην οὐ δυνηθέντα διὰ τὴν τῶν νομοθετηθέντων ἀσθένειαν. Εἶτα διδάσκει ὡς ἡ πίστις εἰς ἔργον ἤγαγε τὸν τοῦ νόμου σκοπόν. Ἅπερ γὰρ ἐκεῖνος κατορθῶσαι μὲν ἠθέλησεν, οὐκ ἴσχυσε δὲ, αὕτη διὰ τῆς τοῦ παναγίου Πνεύματος ἐξετέλεσε χάριτος. Διὰ τούτων δὲ πάντων μανθάνομεν, ὡς ἀεὶ τῶν ἀνθρώπων προμηθούμενος διετέλεσεν ὁ δημιουργήσας ἡμᾶς Θεός. Πρῶτον μὲν γὰρ ἐν τῇ φύσει τῶν ἀγαθῶν καὶ τῶν ἐναντίων τέθεικε τὴν διάκρισιν. Εἶτα διὰ τῆς κτίσεως τοὺς βουληθέντας ἐποδήγησε πρὸς εὐσέβειαν. Εἰ γὰρ καὶ μὴ πάντες ἰδεῖν ἠθέλησαν τὴν ἀλήθειαν, ἀλλ᾽ οὖν οἱ ταύτην ποθήσαντες ἀπήλαυσαν ὧν ἐπόθησαν. Πρὸς δὲ τούτοις κἀκεῖνο ἡμᾶς ἐκπαιδεύει, ὡς οὐκ ἐκ μεταμελείας ὁ τῶν ὅλων Θεὸς ἐπὶ ταύτην ἐλήλυθε τῆς σωτηρίας τὴν μέθοδον· ἀλλ᾽ ἄνωθεν αὐτὴν διὰ τῶν θείων προηγόρευσε προφητῶν. Διδάσκει καὶ τῶν Ἰουδαίων ἀποβολῆς τὴν αἰτίαν, καὶ τοῖς ἐξ ἐθνῶν πεπιστευκόσι παραινεῖ μὴ κατεπαίρεσθαι τούτων· προτρέπων ἐκείνους προελθεῖν τῷ κηρύγματι. καὶ τῆς πρακτικῆς δὲ ἀρετῆς τὴν διδασκαλίαν τοῖς δογματικοῖς ἀνέμιξε

ness for the sins, announced that death will be abolished, and promised life eternal. He knew both the Jews, who were very loyal to the Law, as well as those who suffered from the diseases of Marcion and Valentinus, and the Manichees, who were strongly accusing it. Thus, being completely surrounded by enemies, as an eminent general he hits both and wins the trophy. Thus the divine Apostle destroyed both the gang of the heretics and the phalanx of the Jews through divine grace. For what does he do? )F
EPFT
OPU
FYBMU
UIF
-BX
JNNPEFSBUFMZ
o
CFDBVTF
PG
UIF
BSSPHBODF
PG
UIF
+FXT
o
CVU
he does not offer the impious heretics an occasion to attack it, either. But he shows that it taught what was necessary and that it introduced the teaching of righteousness, which could not be brought to perfection because of the weakness of those who received it. Then he teaches that faith has realized the intention of the Law. For what UIF
-BX
XBOUFE
UP
QFSGFDU
o
CVU
DPVME
OPU
o
this faith has completed through the grace of the All-Holy Spirit. Through all this, we learn that God who created us always has cared for human beings exceedingly. First, He established through nature the power of discerning good from evil. Then, by means of the creation, He led those who wanted it to piety. Even if they all did not wish to see the truth, they who longed for it enjoyed what they longed for. In addition to these things, he also teaches us this: That the God of all did not arrive at this plan of salvation through a change of mind, as it were, but that it was announced beforehand through his divine prophets. He also teaches us the reason for the rejection of the Jews, and he exhorts the believers from the Gentiles not to exalt themselves over them, encouraging them to go forth with the message. And he mixed the words of doctrine with teaching on practical virtue, at the same time teaching the truth

[Theodoret: Arguments of the Pauline Letters. Text in PG 82.]

271

λόγοις, ὁμοῦ καὶ τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἐκπαιδεύων, καὶ τὸ ἦθος ῥυθμίζων. Ἡ μὲν οὖν ὑπόθεσις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς ἐστιν αὕτη· ἀκριβέστερον δὲ πάντα ἡμᾶς ἡ κατὰ μέρος ἑρμηνεία διδάξει.

and establishing orderly behavior. This is the argument of the letter. The exposition section by section will teach us everything more accurately.

ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG

%o%

Argument [of 1 Corinthians]

Κορινθίοις τὸ σωτήριον κήρυγμα πρῶτος The divinely inspired Paul first introduced ὁ θεσπέσιος προσενήνοχε Παῦλος, the message of salvation to the Corinthiκαὶ συχνὸν δὲ παρ᾿ αὐτοῖς διέτριψε ans, and he stayed there for a long time χρόνον, τοῦτο τοῦ Δεσπότου διαῤῥήδην since the Lord had clearly ordered him. παρεγγυήσαντος· »Λάλει« γὰρ, ἔφη πρὸς For ‘speak’, He said to him, ‘and do not be αὐτὸν, »καὶ μὴ σιωπήσῃς· ἔστι γάρ μοι λαὸς silent: for I have many people in this city.’ πολὺς ἐν τῇ πόλει ταύτῃ«. Ἐνιαυτοῦ τοίνυν After one year and six months had passed, καὶ μηνῶν ἓξ διεληλυθότων, αὐτὸς μὲν εἰς he went away to other cities to preach. But ἑτέρας ἐξεδήμησε πόλεις τοῦ κηρύγματος they were eager in sophistic debate and in χάριν. Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τὴν σοφιστικὴν ἔριν their love of honor. They were divided into καὶ φιλοτιμίαν ἐζήλωσαν. Εἰς πολλὰς many parties as they established eloquent γὰρ συμμορίας διῃρέθησαν, ἐλλογίμους men as their teachers, each continued to ἄνδρας προστησάμενοι διδασκάλους, marvel at their own teacher and loved to καὶ ἕκαστοι τὸν οἰκεῖον διετέλουν debate with each other about him. And θαυμάζοντες, καὶ πρὸς ἀλλήλους περὶ one of those who were boasting of their τούτων φιλονεικοῦντες. Εἷς δὲ τούτων smooth speech even dared to commit the τῶν επ᾽ εὐγλωττίᾳ σεμνυνομένων, καὶ most serious crime. For he was sleeping παρανομίαν μεγίστην ἐτόλμησε· τῇ γὰρ with his stepmother, and the people who μητρυιᾷ συνευνάζετο. Οἱ δὲ τῆς τούτου CFMPOHFE
UP
IJT
QBSUZ
PWFSMPPLFE
UIJT
o
συμμορίας τοῦτο μὲν παρεώρων, μόνην they were only praising his eloquence! Beδὲ τὴν εὐγλωττίαν εὐφήμουν. Οὗ δὴ cause of this, the divine Apostle begins his χάριν ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος ἀρξάμενος letter with accusing the supposed wisdom τῆς Ἐπιστολῆς, τῆς νομιζομένης σοφίας and showing that the preaching stripped κατηγορεῖ, καὶ δείκνυσι τὸ κήρυγμα ταύτης of all eloquence has the greatest power. He μὲν γεγυμνωμένον, μεγίστην δὲ δύναμιν rebukes those who have quarrels about ἔχον. Ἐπιμέμφεται δὲ καὶ τοῖς ἀμφισβητοῦσι other matters and use secular officials to μὲν πρὸς ἀλλήλους περὶ πραγμάτων judge between them. He forbids also the ἑτέρων, βιωτικοῖς δὲ ἄρχουσι δικασταῖς acceptance of offerings to idols, suggesting κεχρημένοις. Ἀπαγορεύει δὲ καὶ τὴν τῶν that some of them even dared to do that. In εἰδωλοθύτων μετάληψιν, αἰνιττόμενος the following, he gives advice on the gifts ὡς καὶ τοῦτο παρά τινων ἐτολμᾶτο. Ἐν of both virginity and widowhood. And he δὲ τῷ μεταξὺ, καὶ περὶ παρθενίας καὶ also holds a long speech on spiritual gifts, χηρείας συμβουλεύει τὰ πρόσφορα· teaching about the difference between καὶ μέντοι καὶ περὶ τῶν πνευματικῶν them. And he orders them to use the gift χαρισμάτων μακροὺς ἀποτείνει λόγους, of tongues not because of love of honor but τὴν τούτων διδάσκων διαφορὰν, καὶ when they need it. He brings them also the παρεγγύων τῷ χαρίσματι τῶν γλωττῶν teaching on the resurrection, since some μὴ κατὰ φιλοτιμίαν, ἀλλὰ κατὰ χρείαν, probably tried to persuade them not to

272

Appendix I

κεχρῆσθαι. Προσφέρει δὲ αὐτοῖς καὶ τὴν receive any word about the resurrection περὶ τῆς ἀναστάσεως διδασκαλίαν, τινῶν, of the body. And he also put other things ὡς εἰκὸς, πείθειν αὐτοὺς πειρωμένων τὸν in the letter (in order not to extend this by περὶ τῆς ἀναστάσεως τῶν σωμάτων μὴ mentioning everything), things that both προδέχεσθαι λόγον. καὶ ἄλλα δέ τινα, ἵνα were useful to them and bring benefit to all μὴ καθ᾽ ἕκαστον λέγων μηκύνω, τοῖς humans. But he did not use many words πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἐνέθηκε γράμμασι, κἀκείνοις on doctrine, since he was with them for ὀνησιφόρα, καὶ πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις not a short period of time and thus comὠφέλειαν πραγματευόμενα. Περὶ μέντοι pletely educated them with regard to what τοῦ δόγματος οὐ πολλοῖς ἐχρήσατο they should think. Besides, the wonderful λόγοις, ἐπειδήπερ οὐκ ὀλίγον παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς Apollos arrived after him and strengthδιατρίψας χρόνον, ἀκριβῶς αὐτοὺς ἅπερ ened the apostolic teaching. He imitated δεῖ φρονεῖν ἐξεπαίδευσε, καὶ ὁ θαυμάσιος the best physician and brought an antidote Ἀπολλὼς μετ᾽ αὐτὸν ἀφικόμενος τὴν for each illness. Stephanas, Fortunatus and ἀποστολικὴν διδασκαλίαν ἐκράτυνεν. Achaicus carried the letter, having been Ἄριστον τοίνυν ἰατρὸν ἐμιμήσατο, καὶ τοῖς sent from the Corinthians to Paul, as he πάθεσι κατάλληλα προσενήνοχε φάρμακα. teaches us in the end. He sent the blessed Διηκόνησαν δὲ τοῖς γράμμασι Στεφανᾶς, 5JNPUIZ
UP
UIFN
o
CVU
OPU
XJUI
UIF
MFUUFS
o
καὶ Φουρτουνᾶτος, καὶ Αχαϊκὸς, παρὰ τῶν and this he made clear himself, for he said: Κορινθίων πρὸς αὐτὸν ἀποσταλέντες, ὡς ‘If Timothy come, see that he may be with ἐν τῷ τέλει διδάσκει. τὸν γὰρ μακάριον you without fear.’ Τιμόθεον ἀπέστειλε μὲν πρὸς αὐτοὺς, οὐ μὴν μετὰ ἐπιστολῆς, καὶ τοῦτο δῆλον αὐτὸς πεποίηκεν· ἔφη γάρ· »Ἐὰν ἔλθῃ Τιμόθεος, βλέπετε ἵνα ἀφόβως γένηται πρὸς ὑμᾶς«. ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG 82: 376BC)

Argument [of 2 Corinthians]

Πολλὴν μὲν ἐκ τῆς προτέρας Ἐπιστολῆς οἱ The Corinthians reaped a rich harvest Κορίνθιοι ὄνησιν ἐκαρπώσαντο· ηὔξησαν from the previous letter, and men who δὲ αὐτῶν τὴν ὠφέλειαν καὶ οἱ πάντα ἄριστοι were the most eminent and admirable in καὶ ἀξιάγαστοι, πρῶτος μὲν Τιμόθεος, every respect increased the benefit; first μετὰ δὲ τοῦτον ὁ Τίτος. Ἀμφότεροι γὰρ Timothy and, after him, Titus. For both πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἀπεστάλησαν. Ἀλλὰ πάλιν were sent to them. But, again, some of the τινὲς τῶν ἐξ Ἰουδαίων πεπιστευκότων, τὴν believers from the Jews embracing life unνομικὴν ἀσπαζόμενοι πολιτείαν, πάντοσε der the Law and, going around everywhere, περινοστοῦντες, τὴν ἀποστολικὴν accused the apostolic teaching and called διδασκαλίαν διέβαλλον, ἀποστάτην the divinely inspired Paul an apostate and καὶ παράνομον τὸν θεσπέσιον Παῦλον a lawbreaker, as they were ordering everyἀποκαλοῦντες, καὶ φυλάττειν ἅπασι τὸν one to follow the Law. And this was exactly νόμον παρεγγυῶντες· ταὐτὸ δὲ τοῦτο καὶ what they had done in Corinth. Therefore, ἐν Κορίνθῳ δεδράκασι. Γράφει τοίνυν ὁ the divine Apostle writes, having already θεῖος Ἀπόστολος, ἤδη τὴν Μακεδονίαν arrived in Macedonia as he had promised. κατειληφὼς κατὰ τὴν ὑπόσχεσιν, καὶ And first he composes an apology as he πρῶτον μὲν ἀπολογίαν ὑφαίνει ὡς μηδέπω had not yet come to them, not because he

[Theodoret: Arguments of the Pauline Letters. Text in PG 82.]

273

παραγενόμενος, οὐκ ἐπειδὴ τὴν ὑπόσχεσιν οὐ ἐπέρανεν· ὑπέσχετο γὰρ πρῶτον μὲν Μακεδόνας ὁρᾶν, μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα πρὸς αὐτοὺς παραγίνεσθαι· ἔφη δὲ οὕτως ἐν τῇ προτέρᾳ· »Ἐλεύσομαι δὲ πρὸς ὑμᾶς, ὅταν Μακεδονίαν διέλθω· Μακεδονίαν γὰρ διέρχομαι· πρὸς ὑμᾶς δὲ τυχὸν παραμενῶ, ἢ παραχειμάσω, ἵνα ὑμεῖς με προπέμψητε οὗ ἐὰν πορεύσωμαι«. Οὐ τοίνυν παρὰ τὰς ὑποσχέσεις τι δέδρακεν. Ἀλλ᾽ ἐν Ἐφέσῳ μελλήσας, τῆς βραδύτητος τὰς αἰτίας διδάσκει. Ἀξιοῖ δὲ φειδοῦς καὶ τὸν τὴν παρανομίαν ἐκείνην τολμήσαντα. Εἶτα συγκρίνει τὴν Παλαιὰν τῇ Καινῇ, οὐκ ἐκείνην ἀτιμάζων, ἀλλὰ ταύτην δεικνὺς ὑπερέχουσαν. Μετὰ ταῦτα τοὺς οἰκείους πόνους ἀναριθμεῖται οὐ φιλοτιμίας πάθει δουλεύων, ἀλλὰ τῶν ἐξαπατώντων διελέγχων τὸ ψεῦδος. Προτρέπει δὲ καὶ τῆς τῶν ἁγίων θεραπείας φροντίσαι, τῇ Μακεδόνων μνήμῃ παραθήγων εἰς φιλότιμον χορηγίαν. Τίθησι δὲ καὶ τὸν τῶν οἰκείων παθημάτων κατάλογον, τοῦτον εἶναι χαρακτῆρα διδάσκων τῶν κηρύκων τῆς ἀληθείας. Αὕτη μὲν οὖν τῆς Ἐπιστολῆς ἡ ὑπόθεσις· τὸν δὲ νοῦν τῶν γεγραμμένων ἀκριβέστερον ἡ κατὰ μέρος ἑρμηνεία διδάξει.

had broken his promise. For he had promised that he would first see the Macedonians and after that come to them. Thus he spoke in the previous letter: ‘I will come to you when I shall pass through Macedonia: for I do pass through Macedonia. And it may be that I will stay, and even spend the winter with you, so that you may send me off wherever I may go.’ Therefore, he did not do anything against his promises. But when he was delayed in Ephesus he informs them about the reason for the delay. He considers even the man who had committed that crime worthy to be spared. Then he compares the Old Testament with the New, not degrading the former, but showing that the latter is superior. After that, he numbers his own toils, not because he is a slave of the desire to be honored but because he is refuting the lie of the deceivers. He exhorts them to be concerned about the care of the saints. He encourages them to donate ambitiously by mentioning the Macedonians. He also places a catalogue of his sufferings, teaching that this is the hallmark of the messengers of the truth. This is the argument of the letter. The exposition section by section will teach us everything more accurately.

ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG

#o"

Argument [of Galatians]

Ἀνήροτον μὲν καὶ ἄσπαρτον τῶν Γαλατῶν The thrice-blessed Paul cultivated the race τὸ γένος ὁ τρισμακάριος ἐγεώργησε of the Galatians when it was unplowed and Παῦλος, καὶ τὰ τῆς εὐσεβείας ἐν αὐτῷ unsown, and he sowed the seeds of piety κατέβαλε σπέρματα· αὐξανομένων δὲ in it. When they had grown and carried a τούτων, καὶ βαθὺ δεικνύντων τὸ λήϊον, rich crop, some believers from the Jews arἀφικόμενοί τινες τῶν ἐξ Ἰουδαίων rived, and they were eager to sow beside πεπιστευκότων, τὰ περιττὰ τοῦ νόμου it the unnecessary matters of the law. They παρασπείρειν ἐσπούδαζον, τοὺς boasted of having the most divine apostles, θειοτάτους ἀποστόλους, Πέτρον, καὶ Peter, James, John, and all the others, as Ἰάκωβον, καὶ Ἰωάννην, καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους teachers, and imprudently asserted that ἅπαντας διδασκάλους ἔχειν αὐχοῦντες, καὶ they did what the apostles had decided. τὰ τούτοις δοκοῦντα ποιεῖν νεανιευόμενοι, They slandered the divinely inspired Paul, τὸν δὲ θεσπέσιον διαβάλλοντες Παῦλον, saying that he was not deemed worthy of

274

Appendix I

καὶ φάσκοντες μήτε τῆς Δεσποτικῆς αὐτὸν ἠξιῶσθαι διδασκαλίας, καὶ τῶν ἀποστόλων μαθητὴν γεγενημένον, τὸν τῆς διδασκαλίας διαφθείρειν κανόνα, καὶ παρὰ τὸν ἐκείνων ὅρον παραβαίνειν τὸν νόμον. Ταῦτα καὶ τὰ τούτοις προσόμοια λέγοντες, πολλοὺς ἔπεισαν τῶν Γαλατῶν τὴν νομικὴν πολιτείαν ἀσπάσασθαι, καὶ τὴν περιτομὴν καταδέξασθαι. Μαθὼν τοίνυν ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος, τήνδε γέγραφε τὴν Ἐπιστολήν· τῶν δὲ κατ᾽ αὐτοῦ γεγενημένων διαβολῶν διελέγχων τὸ ψεῦδος, καὶ τὴν κατὰ νόμον πολιτείαν μετὰ τὴν χάριν περιττὴν ἀποφαίνων. Πρῶτον δὲ τὰ καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν ἐξηγήσατο, διδάσκων ὡς καὶ αὐτὸς τῆς ἄνωθεν τετύχηκε κλήσεως, οὐκ ἀνθρώπων διδασκαλίᾳ πεισθεὶς, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὸ τῆς Δεσποτικῆς φωνῆς. Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει, οὐ τὰ τῶν ἀποστόλων σμικρύνων, ἀλλὰ τὴν ἐπισκήψασαν νόσον προσφόροις θεραπεύων φαραμάκοις. Ὅτι γὰρ ἔκτρωμα καλεῖ ἑαυτὸν, καὶ τῶν ἀποστόλων ἔσχατον, καὶ τῶν ἁμαρτωλῶν πρῶτον, καὶ βλάσφημον ὀνομάζει, καὶ διώκτην, καὶ ὑβριστὴν, ἴσασιν οἱ τοῖς ἐκείνου γράμμασιν ἐντυγχάνοντες. Ἀλλ᾽ ἐνταῦθα τὴν γεγενημένην βλάβην ἀποσκευαζόμενος, γυμνῶσαι τὰ καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν ἠναγκάσθη, καὶ τῶν διαφθείρειν τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον πειρωμένων τὴν ψευδολογίαν ἐλέγχων, καὶ τῶν ἐκείνοις ὑποταχθέντων θεραπεύων τὸ πάθος.

being taught by the Lord, that he had become a disciple of the apostles, that he destroyed the rule of the teaching and that he against their decision was a transgressor of the Law. By saying such things, they persuaded many of the Galatians to embrace life under the law and receive circumcision. Therefore, when the Apostle learned this, he wrote this letter. He demonstrates the falsity in the slanderous statements uttered against him and shows that life under the Law is useless after grace has come. First, he relates matters pertaining to him, teaching that also he received the call from above and that he was not won over through human teaching but by the voice of the Lord. He says this not to degrade the apostles but to cure the disease that had erupted with beneficial medicines. For he calls himself a miscarriage, and the least of the apostles. And he names himself the first of sinners, a blasphemer, a persecutor and an injurious person. They who read his letters know that. But here, to remove the damage they had received, he is forced to reveal matters pertaining to him, both refuting the lies of those who try to destroy the Gospel and curing the illness of those who were subjected to them.

ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG

"o%

Argument [of Ephesians]

Τινὲς τῶν προηρμηνευκότων τὸν θεῖον Ἀπόστολον, ἔφασαν τὸν θεσπέσιον Ἰωάννην τὸν εὐαγγελιστὴν πρῶτον παραδεδωκέναι τοῖς Ἐφεσίοις τὸ σωτήριον κήρυγμα· τινὲς δὲ ἄλλους μέν τινας εἰρήκασι πεποιηκέναι, τὸν δὲ θειότατον Παῦλον μηδέπω τοὺς Ἐφεσίους τεθεαμένον, τήνδε τὴν Ἐπιστολὴν πρὸς αὐτοὺς γεγραφέναι. Ἀλλ᾽ ἡ τῶν ἀποστολικῶν Πράξεων ἱστορία τούτων ἡμᾶς οὐδέτερον διδάσκει. Σαφέστερον δὲ μαθησόμεθα τὴν ἀλήθειαν,

Some of the previous interpreters of the divine Apostle have said that the divinely inspired John first delivered the message of salvation to the Ephesians. Others have said that somebody else did it, and that the divinely inspired Paul wrote the letter to them when he had not yet seen them. But the history of the apostolic acts teaches us neither. We will more clearly learn the truth if we may recall that story. For when a discussion about the Law began in An-

[Theodoret: Arguments of the Pauline Letters. Text in PG 82.]

275

εἰ τῆς διηγήσεως ἐκείνης ἀναμνησθείημεν. tioch, the most divine Barnabas and Paul Ἐν Ἀντιοχείᾳ γὰρ, τῆς περὶ τοῦ νόμου were sent to the holy apostles. Having reζητήσεως γενομένης, ἀπεστάλησαν ceived the solution to the strife and carried πρὸς τοὺς ἁγίους ἀποστόλους οἱ the letter about it back, they again reached θειότατοι Βαρνάβας καὶ Παῦλος, καὶ τῆς Antioch. Evidently, the divinely inspired ἀμφισβητήσεως τὴν λύσιν δεξάμενοι, καὶ Paul had at that time made the agreements τὰ περὶ ταύτης κομισάμενοι γράμματα, with the leading apostles that he treats κατέλαβον πάλιν τὴν Ἀντιόχειαν. Δῆλον in the letter to the Galatians: ‘And when δὲ ὡς κατὰ τουτονὶ τὸν καιρὸν, καὶ τὰς James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to πρὸς τοὺς κορυφαίους τῶν ἀποστόλων be the pillars, perceived the grace that was ἐποιήσατο συνθήκας, περὶ ὧν ἐν τῇ πρὸς given unto me, they gave to me and BarnΓαλάτας ὁ θεσπέσιος ἔφη Παῦλος· »καὶ abas the right hands of fellowship; that we γνόντες τὴν χάριν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὴν δοθεῖσάν should go to the Gentiles, and they unto μοι, Ἰάκωβος, καὶ Κηφᾶς, καὶ Ἰωάννης, οἱ the circumcision.’ From this, it is easy to δοκοῦντες στῦλοι εἶναι, δεξιὰς ἔδωκαν ἐμοὶ see that the divine apostle John had not yet καὶ Βαρνάβᾳ κοινωνίας, ἵνα αὐτοὶ μὲν εἰς left Judea. After the return from Jerusalem, τὴν περιτομὴν, ἡμεῖς δὲ εἰς τὰ ἔθνη«. Ἐξ ὧν a contention about the blessed Mark arose ῥᾴδιον κατιδεῖν, ὡς οὐδέπω καταλελοίπει between the holy apostles Barnabas and τὴν Ἰουδαίαν ὁ θεῖος ἀπόστολος Ἰωάννης. Paul. He took Mark with him and sailed Μετὰ μέντοι τὴν ἀπὸ τῶν Ἱεροσολύμων off to Cyprus, while the most divine Paul ἐπάνοδον, τῆς περὶ τοῦ μακαρίου Μάρκου went with Silas through Syria and Cilicia φιλονεικίας τοῖς ἁγιοίς ἀποστόλοις and reached Lycaonia. There, having cirγεγενημένης, Βαρνάβᾳ καὶ Παύλῳ, ὁ cumcised the eminent Timothy, he set out μὲν τὸν Μάρκον λαβὼν, εἰς τὴν Κύπρον to Phrygia and Galatia, sowing the seeds of ἐξέπλευσεν, ὁ δὲ θειότατος Παῦλος piety. For the Holy Spirit, he says, forbade μετὰ τοῦ Σίλα τὴν Συρίαν καὶ Κιλικίαν them to preach the word in Asia. Then, περινοστήσας, εἰς τὴν Λυκαονίαν ἀφίκετο· having passed through Mysia they tried to ἐκεῖ δὲ τὸν πάντα ἄριστον περιτεμὼν bring the message of salvation even to the Τιμόθεον, εἰς τὴν Φρυγίαν καὶ Γαλατίαν Bithynians. Again, they were prevented by ἐξώρμησε, τῆς εὐσεβείας κατασπείρων the Divine Spirit. When they had reached τὰ σπέρματα· ἐκώλυσε γὰρ αὐτοὺς, φησὶ, Troas, they were called to Macedonia by τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον λαλῆσαι τὸν λόγον grace. Then, having brought the ray of ἐν τῇ Ἀσίᾳ. Εἶτα τὴν Μυσίαν διελθόντες knowledge of the divine to Macedonia and ἐπειράθησαν καὶ Βιθυνοῖς προσενεγκεῖν τὸ to the Athenians and to the Corinthians, σωτήριον κήρυγμα, καὶ πάλιν ὑπὸ τοῦ θείου they came to Ephesus. With the Apostle Πνεύματος ἐκωλύθησαν. Τὴν δὲ Τρωάδα were Aquila and Priscilla. The blessed Luke καταλαβόντες, εἰς τὴν Μακεδονίαν teaches that he went into the synagogue ὑπὸ τῆς χάριτος προσεκλήθησαν. Εἶτα and spoke with the Jews and that he, when μετὰ τὴν Μακεδονίαν καὶ Ἀθηναίοις καὶ asked to stay with them, did not yield but Κορινθίοις τῆς θεογνωσίας τὴν ἀκτῖνα sailed off for Judaea. It is therefore very προσενεγκόντες, εἰς τὴν Ἔφεσον ἦλθον· clear that the city of the Ephesians had not συνῆν δὲ τῷ Ἀποστόλῳ καὶ Ἀκύλας καὶ yet enjoyed the message of salvation. For Πρίσκιλλα. Διδάσκει τοίνυν ὁ μακάριος the divine Apostle would never have left Λουκᾶς, ὡς εἰσελθὼν εἰς τὴν συναγωγὴν them behind and gone to the synagogue of διελέχθη τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις, καὶ παρακληθεὶς the Jews. And the rest of the story teach-

276

Appendix I

αὐτοῖς συνδιατρίψαι οὐκ εἶξεν, ἀλλ᾽ εἰς τὴν Ἰουδαίαν ἀπέπλευσεν. Εὔδηλον τοίνυν ὡς οὐδέπω τῶν Ἐφεσίων ἡ πόλις κατὰ τὸν καιρὸν ἐκεῖνον ἀπολελαύκει σωτηρίου κηρύγματος. Οὐ γὰρ ἂν τοὺς πιστοὺς καταλελοιπὼς ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος ὥρμησεν εἰς τὴν τῶν Ἰουδαίων συναγωγήν. καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς δὲ τῆς ἱστορίας τοῦτο διδάσκει σαφέστερον. Ἐπανελθὼν γὰρ πάλιν ἀπὸ τῆς Ἰουδαίας εὗρέ τινας ἐν Ἐφέσῳ τὸν ἀριθμὸν δυοκαίδεκα, κατηχηθέντας μὲν, τοῦ δὲ θείου Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν οὐ δεδεγμένους, τὸ δὲ Ἰωάννου βάπτισμα μόνον ἐπισταμένους. Τούτους τοίνυν βαπτίσας, δύο κατὰ ταυτὸν ἔτη διέτριψεν αὐτόθι, παιδεύων τοὺς Ἐφεσίους τὰ σωτήρια δόγματα. καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς διελέγετο· ἐπειδὴ δὲ συνήθως ἀντέλεγον Ἰουδαῖοι, ἐν τῇ Τυράννου σχολῇ τὰς διατριβὰς ἐποιεῖτο. Ἐν ταύτῃ τῇ πόλει, καὶ ὁ χρὼς τῶν ἱματίων αὐτοῦ τὰς νόσους ἐξήλασε, καὶ τοῖς Σκευᾶ υἱέσιν ὁ δαίμων ἐφαλλόμενος ἐβόησε· »τὸν Ἰησοῦν γινώσκω, καὶ τὸν Παῦλον ἐπίσταμαι, ὑμεῖς δὲ, τίνες ἐστέ;« Ἐν ταύτῃ καὶ τὰ τῆς γοητείας ἐνεπρήσθη συγγράμματα, ὧν τὴν τιμὴν συνεψήφισαν, καὶ εὗρον ἀργυρίου μυριάδας πέντε. Ὅτι μὲν οὖν οὐχ ὁ θεῖος Ἰωάννης αὐτοῖς πρῶτος προσενήνοχε τὸ σωτήριον κήρυγμα, ἀλλ᾽ ὁ θεσπέσιος Παῦλος, σαφῶς ἡμᾶς ἐδίδαξεν ἡ τῶν Πράξεων ἱστορία. ὅτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἐπιστολὴν μετὰ ταῦτα γέγραφεν, αὐτὰ διδάσκει τὰ γράμματα. Πρὸς γὰρ τῷ τέλει φησίν· »ἵνα δὲ εἰδῆτε καὶ ὑμεῖς τὰ κατ᾽ ἐμὲ, ὅ τι πράσσω, πάντα ὑμῖν γνωρίσει Τυχικὸς ὁ ἀγαπητὸς ἀδελφὸς, καὶ πιστὸς διάκονος ἐν Κυρίῳ, ὃν ἔπεμψα πρὸς ὑμᾶς εἰς αὐτὸ τοῦτο, ἵνα γνῶτε τὰ περὶ ἡμῶν, καὶ παρακαλέσῃ τὰς καρδίας ὑμῶν«. τὸν δὲ μακάριον Τυχικὸν ἀπὸ τῆς Ῥώμης ἀπέστειλε, καὶ τοῦτο ἐν τῇ πρὸς Τιμόθεον δευτέρᾳ διδάσκει. Εἰρηκὼς γάρ· »Σπούδασον ταχέως ἐλθεῖν πρός με· Δημᾶς γάρ με ἐγκατέλιπεν ἀγαπήσας τὸν νῦν αἰῶνα, καὶ ἐπορεύθη

es us this with greater clarity: For having returned from Judaea, he found twelve people in Ephesus who had received basic instruction, but not the grace of the Divine Spirit, as they knew only the baptism of John. Having baptized them, he stayed two years there, in the same place teaching the Ephesians the doctrines that bring salvation. And first he spoke in the synagogues. Since the Jews were wont to speak against him, he gave his instructions in the Hall of Tyrannus. In this city, even the surface of his garments drove out diseases, and the evil spirit leaped on the sons of Sceva and cried: ‘Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are you?’ In this city, books of magic were burned, of which they counted the price and found it to be fifty thousand pieces of silver. Thus, the history of the Acts teaches us clearly that it was not the divine John who first brought the message of salvation to them, but the divinely inspired Paul. The letter itself teaches us that he also wrote the letter after these things happened. For towards the end, he says: ‘But that you also may know my affairs, and how I do, Tychicus, a beloved brother and faithful minister in the Lord, shall make known to you all things: Whom I have sent unto you for the same purpose, that you might know my affairs, and that he might comfort your hearts.’ The blessed Tychicus he sent from Rome, and this he teaches in the second letter to Timothy. For he has said: ‘Do your best to visit me soon, for Demas has deserted me for the love of the present world, and has gone to Thessalonice, Crescens to Galatia, Titus to Dalmatia. Luke alone is with me. Get hold of Mark and bring him along, for he is helpful to me in service.’ And he added: ‘I have sent Tychicus to Ephesus.’ He teaches us clearly in this letter that he wrote this letter as his last one: ‘For I am already on the point of being sacrificed; the time of my departure

[Theodoret: Arguments of the Pauline Letters. Text in PG 82.]

277

εἰς Θεσσαλονικὴν, Κρήσκης εἰς Γαλατίαν, has drawn near.’ Thus, having preached to Τίτος εἰς Δαλματίαν· Λουκᾶς ἐστι μόνος the Ephesians, he traveled a second time to μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ· Μάρκον ἀναλαβὼν ἄγε μετὰ Macedonia and Achaea, and from there to σεαυτοῦ· ἔστι γὰρ χρήσιμος εἰς διακονίαν«· Judea. Therefore, he reached Rome after he ἐπήγαγε· »Τυχικὸν δὲ ἀπέστειλα εἰς had stayed in Ephesus. Writing from Rome, Ἔφεσον.« Ὅτι δὲ ἐσχάτην ταύτην ἔγραψε he showed that he had sent Tychicus to τὴν Ἐπιστολὴν, σαφῶς ἐν αὐτῇ διδάσκει· Ephesus. And Tychicus was the carrier of »Ἐγὼ γὰρ ἤδη σπένδομαι, καὶ ὁ καιρὸς τῆς the letter to the Ephesians. Therefore it has ἐμῆς ἀναλύσεως ἐφέστηκεν«. Ὁ τοίνυν clearly been shown that he wrote the letter Ἐφεσίοις κηρύξας, τὸ δεύτερον εἰς τὴν after he had preached the Gospel to them. Μακεδονίαν καὶ τὴν Αχαΐαν ἐξόρμησε, The first part of the letter contains teachκἀκεῖθεν εἰς τὴν Ἰουδαίαν. Εἶτα τῇ Ἐφέσῳ ing of the divine message, the second part, χρησάμενος τὴν Ῥώμην κατέλαβεν. ethical exhortation. Ἐκεῖθεν δὲ γράφων ἐδήλωσεν ὡς Τυχικὸν ἀπέστειλεν εἰς Ἔφεσον· Τυχικὸς δὲ τῶν πρὸς Ἐφεσίους γραμμάτων διάκονος. Δέδεικται ἄρα σαφῶς, ὡς προκηρύξας αὐτοῖς τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον οὕτως ἔγραψε τὴν Ἐπιστολήν. τῆς δὲ Ἐπιστολῆς τὰ μὲν πρῶτα περιέχει διδασκαλίαν τοῦ θείου κηρύγματος, τὰ δὲ τελευταῖα παραίνεσιν ἠθικήν. ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG

$o"

Argument [of Philippians]

Ἀπὸ τῆς θείας χάριτος κυβερνώμενος ὁ The divine Apostle came to Macedonia θεῖος ἀπόστολος ἀπὸ μὲν τῆς Τρωάδας from Troas, guided by divine grace. He εἰς Μακεδονίαν ἀφίκετο· πρώτοις δὲ brought the divine Gospel first to the PhiΦιλιππησίοις τὸ θεῖον προσενήνοχεν lippians and he confirmed the gospel by Εὐαγγέλιον, ἐβεβαίωσε δὲ καὶ working miracles. For there he cast out a θαυματουργίαις τὸ κήρυγμα. Ἐκεῖ γὰρ καὶ false divining demon from a girl. There, τὸν ψευδόμαντιν ἔκ τινος κόρης ἐξήλασε when he stayed in prison with Silas, having δαίμονα· ἐκεῖ σὺν τῷ Σίλᾳ τὸ δεσμωτήριον his hands and feet bound, he was praising οἰκήσας, καὶ πεδηθεὶς χεῖράς τε καὶ πόδας, God throughout the night. And He who καὶ πάννυχος διετέλεσε τὸν θεὸν ἀνυμνῶν. was praised shook the prison and freed Ὁ δέ γε ὑμνούμενος ἔσεισε μὲν τὸ all the prisoners of their fetters. Through δεσμωτήριον, ἔλυσε δὲ τὰ τῶν πεπεδημένων a most brilliant light He revealed his own ἁπάντων δεσμά· διὰ δέ τινος λαμπροτάτου coming. These things moved the keeper φωτὸς τὴν οἰκείαν ἐδήλωσεν ἐπιφάνειαν. of the prison to approach salvation. And Ταῦτα καὶ τὸν δεσμοφύλακα προσδραμεῖν he, with all his house, enjoyed the light τῇ σωτηρίᾳ κατήπειξεν· ἀπήλαυσε δὲ σὺν of knowledge of the divine. Before this, αὐτῷ καὶ πᾶς ὁ οἶκος τοῦ τῆς θεογνωσίας the seller of purple had come into his φωτός. Πρὸ δέ γε τούτων ἡ πορφυρόπωλις net. Therefore the Philippians appeared εἴσω τῆς τούτου σαγήνης ἐγένετο. Θερμοὶ as ardent lovers of piety. Evidence of their τοίνυν οἱ Φιλιππήσιοι τῆς εὐσεβείας great zeal for the divine is that they not

278

Appendix I

ἀπεφάνθησαν ἐρασταί. Τεκμήριον δὲ only served the divine Apostle when he τῆς περὶ τὰ θεῖα προθυμίας αὐτῶν, τὸ μὴ was present but also sent money both to μόνον παρόντα θεραπεῦσαι τὸν θεῖον Thessalonice and Corinth for his bodily Ἀπόστολον, ἀλλὰ καὶ εἰς Θεσσαλονίκην, sustenance. And they did the same thing καὶ εἰς Κόρινθον πέμψαι χρήματα, εἰς τὴν when he arrived in Rome. For they sent τοῦ σώματος αὐτοῦ ἐπιμέλειαν. Ταυτὸ the blessed Epaphroditus, who was enδὲ τοῦτο δεδράκασι καὶ ἡνίκα τὴν Ῥώμην trusted with the care of their souls, to the κατέλαβε. τὸν γὰρ μακάριον Ἐπαφρόδιτον, very great city of Rome, as they did not fear ὃς τῶν ψυχῶν αὐτῶν ἐπιστεύθη ἐπιμέλειαν, the fierceness of Nero. Because of this he εἰς τὴν μεγίστην ἐκείνην ἀπέστειλαν wrote the letter, praising their readiness πόλιν. οὐ δείσαντες τὸ θηριῶδες τοῦ in love and exhorting them to do what is Νέρωνος. Διὰ τούτου ταύτην γέγραφε appropriate. Most of all, he orders them τὴν Ἐπιστολὴν, καὶ τὴν τῆς ἀγάπης αὐτῶν to flee the deception of the believers from ἀποδεχόμενος προθυμίαν, καὶ παραινῶν the Jews, as they attempt to defend the Law τὰ προσήκοντα. Μάλιστα δὲ αὐτοῖς and try to destroy the message of salvation. παρεγγυᾷ φεύγειν τὴν ἐξαπάτην τῶν ἐξ Ἰουδαίων μὲν πεπιστευκότων, συνηγορεῖν δὲ πειρωμένων τῷ νόμῳ, καὶ διαφθείρειν ἐπιχειρούντων τὸ σωτήριον κήρυγμα. ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG

"o#

Argument [of Colossians]

Κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν καιρὸν Ἐφεσίοις καὶ The divine Apostle wrote to the Ephesians Κολασσεῦσιν ἔγραψεν ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος, and to the Colossians at the same time, and τῷ θαυμασίῳ Τυχικῷ διακόνῳ τῶν used the wonderful Tychicus as the letter γραμμάτων χρησάμενος. Ἔγραψε δὲ ἀπὸ carrier. He wrote from Rome when he had τῆς Ῥώμης, ἤδη τὸν πρῶτον διαφυγὼν already escaped the first danger. The prooκίνδυνον· καὶ δηλοῖ τῆς Ἐπιστολῆς τὸ emium of the letter makes this clear: For he προοίμιον. Κοινωνὸν γὰρ τῶν γραμμάτων made the thrice-blessed Timothy co-writer τὸν τρισμακάριον Τιμόθεον ἐποιήσατο· of the letter. When he had his first fight beἡνίκα δὲ τὸν πρῶτον ἔσχε, ἐπὶ Νέρωνος, fore Nero, nobody of his friends was with ἀγῶνα, οὐδεὶς αὐτῷ τῶν γνωρίμων συνῆν. him. And this he has showed himself in καὶ τοῦτο αὐτὸς δεδήλωκεν ἐν τοῖς πρὸς the letter to Timothy: ‘At my first defense, Τιμόθεον γράμμασιν· »Ἐν τῇ πρώτῃ μὲν no one stood by my side.’ And now when ἀπολογίᾳ οὐδείς μοι συμπαρεγένετο«. he was near the end of his life, Timothy did καὶ ὅτε δὲ πρὸς αὐτὸ ἦν λοιπὸν τοῦ βίου not live in Rome, but rather in Asia. And τὸ τέρμα, οὐκ ἐν τῇ Ρώμῃ διῆγεν ὁ θεῖος the second letter written to him teaches us Τιμόθεος, ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον ἐν τῇ Ἀσίᾳ. καὶ this with greater clarity. For he said: ‘For I τοῦτο διδάσκει σαφέστερον ἡ πρὸς αὐτὸν am already on the point of being sacrificed; γραφεῖσα δευτέρα Ἐπιστολή. Εἰρηκὼς γὰρ· the time of my departure has drawn near.’ »Ἐγὼ γὰρ ἤδη σπένδομαι, καὶ ὁ καιρὸς A little later, he says: ‘Do your best to visit τῆς ἐμῆς ἀναλύσεως ἐφέστηκε«· μετ᾽ me soon.’ And he adds: ‘Bring with you ὀλίγα φησί· »Σπούδασον ἐλθεῖν πρός με the cloak that I left at Troas with Carpus, ταχέως«. Εἶτα ἐπάγει· »τὸν φελώνην, ὃν and the books, especially the parchments.’ ἀπέλιπον ἐν Τρωάδι παρὰ Κάρπῳ, ἄγαγε Some say that the divine Apostle had not

[Theodoret: Arguments of the Pauline Letters. Text in PG 82.]

μετὰ σεαυτοῦ, καὶ τὰ βιβλία, μάλιστα τὰς μεμβράνας«. Τινὲς μέντοι φασὶ μηδέπω τοὺς Κολασσαεῖς τεθεαμένον τὸν θεῖον Ἀπόστολον γράψαι πρὸς αὐτοὺς τὴν Ἐπιστολὴν, καὶ τοῦτο συνιστάνειν ἐκ τῶν ῥητῶν ἐκείνων ἐπιχειροῦσι· »Θέλω γὰρ ὑμᾶς εἰδέναι ἡλίκον ἀγῶνα ἔχω περὶ ὑμῶν, καὶ τῶν ἐν Λαοδικείᾳ, καὶ ὅσοι οὐχ ἑωράκασι τὸ πρόσωπόν μου ἐν σαρκί«. Ἔδει δὲ συνιδεῖν τῶν ῥητῶν τὴν διάνοιαν. Βούλεται γὰρ εἰπεῖν, ὅτι Οὐ μόνον ὑμῶν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν μὴ τεθεαμένων με πολλὴν ἔχω φροντίδα. Εἰ γὰρ τῶν μὴ ἑωρακότων αὐτὸν μόνον τὴν μέριμναν περιέφερε, τῶν ἀπολαυσάντων αὐτοῦ τῆς θέας καὶ τῆς διδασκαλίας οὐδεμίαν ἔχει φροντίδα. Κατ᾽ ἐκείνην γὰρ τὴν διάνοιαν τοῦτό εστι νοῆσαι· »Ἡλίκον« γὰρ, φησὶν, »ἀγῶνα ἔχω περὶ ὑμῶν, καὶ τῶν ἐν Λαοδικείᾳ, καὶ ὅσοι οὐχ ἑωράκασι τὸ πρόσωπόν μου ἐν σαρκί«. Δῆλον τοίνυν, ὡς οὐ περὶ αὐτῶν τοῦτο ἔφη, ἀλλὰ βεβαιῶσαι τὰ κατ᾽αὐτοὺς βουληθεὶς ἐκεῖνο τέθεικεν, ὅτι οὐ μόνον ὑμῶν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν μηδέπω τεθεαμένων με πολλὴν ἔχω φροντίδα. Ἐδίδαξε δὲ ἡμᾶς καὶ ὁ τρισμακάριος Λουκᾶς ἐν ταῖς Πράξεσιν, ὡς κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν καιρὸν διῆλθε τὴν Φρυγίαν καὶ τὴν Γαλατικὴν χώραν. τῆς δὲ Φρυγίας αἱ Κολασσαί· Μητρόπολις δὲ αὐτῆς καὶ γείτων, ἡ Λαοδίκεια. Πῶς τοίνυν οἷόν τε ἦν αὐτὸν ἀφικόμενον εἰς τὴν Φρυγίαν, τὸ θεῖον αὐταῖς μὴ προσενεγκεῖν Εὐαγγέλιον; Οὐδὲ εἴποι τις ἂν, ὡς ὑπὸ τῆς θείας ἐκωλύθησαν χάριτος τοῦτο πρᾶξαι. Περὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς Ἀσίας καὶ τῆς Βιθυνίας εἶπεν ὁ μακάριος Λουκᾶς κεκωλυκέναι αὐτοὺς τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον. περὶ δέ γε τῆς Φρυγίας οὐδὲν τοιοῦτον ἔφη. Ἀλλὰ τοῦτο μὲν ὡς βούλεταί τις νοείτω· οὐδὲ γὰρ δογμάτων ποιεῖ διαφορὰν τὸ οὕτως ἢ ἐκείνως εἰπεῖν. Ἡ δὲ ὑπόθεσις τῆς Ἐπιστολῆς ἐστὶν αὕτη· Τινὲς τῶν ἐξ Ἰουδαίων πεπιστευκότων ἐξηπάτησαν, καὶ παρεσκεύασαν τούτους φυλάττειν τοῦ νόμου τὰ περιττά. Γέγραφε τοίνυν ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος, διδάσκων ὡς

279

yet seen the Colossians when he wrote the letter to them and they try to establish this through these words: ‘For I would that you knew what great conflict I have for you, and for them at Laodicea, and for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh.’ But they should have understood the sense of these words. For he wants to say ‘I am not only very much concerned about you, but also about them who have not seen me.’ For if he only were worried about those who had not seen him, he would not at all be concerned about those who had enjoyed both the sight of him and his teaching! And one should interpret the following in this sense: ‘What great conflict’, he says ‘I have for you, and for them at Laodicea, and for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh.’ It is therefore clear that he did not say this about them, but he put it there because he wanted to confirm his relationship to them by saying: ‘I have great concern not only for you but also for them who have not yet seen me.’ And the thrice-blessed Luke taught us in Acts that he at that time traveled through Phrygia and the Galatian land. The city of Colossae lies in Phrygia. Its chief city and neighbor is Laodicea. How could he have been able not to bring the divine Gospel to these cities when he arrived in Phrygia? And no one might say that he was prevented from doing this through divine grace. Concerning Asia and Bithynia, the blessed Luke said that the Holy Spirit prevented them. But concerning Phrygia, he said no such thing. But let everyone understand this as he wishes! It does not make a difference in doctrine whether one says this thing or the other. The argument of the letter is this: Some of the believers from the Jews deceived them and made them observe the unnecessary matters of the Law. Therefore the divine Apostle wrote to them, teaching that the Lord Christ has become for us the

280

Appendix I

τῆς σωτηρίας ἡμῖν ὁ Δεσπότης Χριστὸς γεγένηται χορηγός. Δείκνυσι δὲ καὶ τὸ τῆς οἰκονομίας μυστήριον πάντα λογισμὸν ὑπερβαῖνον ἀνθρώπινον, καὶ ὅτι κονιωνοὶ τῆς τοῦ Χριστοῦ βασιλείας ἐσόμεθα, καὶ ὅτι τοῖς τελείοις αἱ νομικαὶ παρατηρήσεις οὐ πρόσφοροι.

procurer of salvation. And he shows that the mystery of the plan transcends all human thought and that we will be sharers of the kingdom of Christ and that the legal observances are not beneficial to the perfect.

ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG 82: 628C)

Argument [of 1 Thessalonians]

Ἡ Θεσσαλονίκη πρωτεύει μὲν τῆς Μακεδονίας· ἐδέξατο δὲ προθύμως τὸ σωτήριον κήρυγμα. Ὁ δὲ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος καὶ ἐνταῦθα κατέπηξε τὰ τῆς εὐσεβείας θεμέλια, ἀντιλεγόντων μὲν Ἰουδαίων καὶ προφανῶς πολεμούντων· ἀνόνητα δὲ πονούντων. ὑπερέπλει γὰρ τῶν κυμάτων τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον. Τὰς τούτων ἐκκλίνας ἐπιβουλὰς ὁ θεσπέσιος Παῦλος, ἀπὸ μὲν τῆς Θεσσσαλονίκης εἰς τὴν Βέροιαν ἦλθεν, ἀπὸ δὲ τῆς Βεροίας εἰς τὰς Ἀθήνας ἀπέπλευσε. τῶν δέ γε πεπιστευκότων διηνεκῶς περιφέρων τὴν μέριμναν, τὸν τρισμακάριον Τιμόθεον ἀπὸ τῶν Ἀθηνῶν εἰς τὴν Θεσσαλονίκην ἐξέπεμψεν, ὥστε αὐτοὺς ἐρεῖσαι καὶ κρατῦναι, καὶ τῶν παρὰ τῶν ἐναντίων προσφερομένων μηχανημάτων δεῖξαι δυνατωτέρους. Οὗτος ἐπανελθὼν ἐπῄνεσε μὲν τὸ τῆς πίστεως ἄμαχον, ἔφη δὲ δεῖσθαι αὐτοὺς διδασκαλίας τινὸς παραινέσεως περί τινων ζητημάτων παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς κινουμένων. Γέγραφε τοίνυν τὴν ἐπιστολὴν, πρῶτον μὲν αὐτῶν τὸ στεῤῥὸν τῆς πίστεως εὐφημῶν, ἔπειτα προσμένειν τῶν νεκρῶν τὴν ἀνάστασιν παραινῶν, τῆς δὲ τοῦ κυρίου παρουσίας μὴ πολυπραγμονεῖν τὸν καιρόν. Προσενήνοχε δὲ αὐτοῖς καὶ τῆς ἠθικῆς διδασκαλίας παραίνεσιν. Ἀκριβέστερον δὲ ταῦτα ἡ κατὰ μέρος ἑρμηνεία διδάξει.

Thessalonice was the chief city of Macedonia. It had eagerly received the message of salvation. And the divine Apostle laid the foundations of piety also there. Some Jews were opposing it and openly fighting against it, but their toil was in vain. For the Gospel sailed above the waves. When the divinely inspired Paul had escaped their plots, he came to Beroea from Thessalonice, and from Beroea he sailed to Athens. As he was constantly caring for his converts, he sent the thrice-blessed Timothy from Athens to Thessalonice, in order to confirm and strengthen them and to show that they were stronger than the schemes brought by the opponents. When he came back he praised the invincibility of their faith but said that they needed advice on the teaching regarding some discussions that had arisen among them. Therefore he wrote the letter. First he praises the firmness of their faith, and then he exhorts them to expect the resurrection of the dead but not to pay overly much attention to the time of the coming of the Lord. And he also brought them exhortation with ethical teaching. The exposition section by section will teach us these things more accurately.

ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG 82: 657AB)

Argument [of 2 Thessalonians]

Γνοὺς ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος τὴν ἐκ τῶν προτέρων γραμμάτων τοῖς

When the divine Apostle learned that the Thessalonians had profited from the pre-

[Theodoret: Arguments of the Pauline Letters. Text in PG 82.]

281

Θεσσαλονικεῦσιν ἐγγινομένην ὠφέλειαν, vious letter and that they nobly had enκαὶ ὅτι χαλεπῶς ὑπὲρ τῆς πίστεως dured the assaults of the opponents when πολεμούμενοι φέρουσι γενναίως τῶν they were under heavy attack for the sake ἐναντίων τὰς προσβολὰς, καὶ δευτέραν of faith, he wrote them also a second letαὐτοῖς Ἐπιστολὴν γέγραφε, παραθήγων ter, inciting courage and comforting them εἰς ἀνδρείαν, καὶ τῇ τῶν μελλόντων ἐλπίδι with the hope of the things to come. Beψυχαγωγῶν. Ἐπειδὴ δὲ καὶ πεῖσαί τινες cause some had tried to persuade them to αὐτοὺς ἐπειράθησαν, ὡς ἐνέστηκεν ὁ τῆς believe that the time of the end had drawn συντελείας καιρὸς, τὸν Ἀπόστολον ταῦτα near, asserting that the Apostle had said so. λέγοντες εἰρηκέναι· καὶ περὶ τούτων And he wrote about these things, teachἐπέστειλε, τὰ προσήκοντα διδάσκων, ὡς ing them what was appropriate; that the δεῖ πρότερον ὀφθῆναι τὸν τῆς ἀληθείας enemy of truth first must appear, referring ἐχθρὸν, τὸν Ἀντίχριστον λέγων· εἶθ᾽ οὕτω to the Antichrist, then our God and Savior γίνεσθαι τὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ Σωτῆρος ἡμῶν will come. He also gave useful exhortation ἐπιφάνειαν. Παρῄνεσε δὲ καὶ τοῖς τὸν to those who preferred a leisurely life. We ἀργὸν βίον προαιρουμένοις τὰ πρόσφορα. will understand the meaning of every part Ἑκάστου δὲ τούτων τὴν διάνοιαν ἐκ τῆς of this from the exposition of the words. τῶν ῥητῶν ἑρμηνείας εἰσόμεθα. ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG

$o#

Argument [of Hebrews]

Θαυμαστὸν οὐδὲν δρῶσιν οἱ τὴν Ἀρειανικὴν εἰσδεξάμενοι νόσον, κατὰ τῶν ἀποστολικῶν λυττῶντες γραμμάτων, καὶ τὴν πρὸς Ἑβραίους Ἐπιστολὴν τῶν λοιπῶν ἀποκρίνοντες, καὶ νόθον ταύτην ἀποκαλοῦντες. Οἱ γὰρ κατὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ Σωτῆρος ἡμῶν τὰς γλώττας κινοῦντες, τί οὐκ ἂν τολμήσαιεν κατὰ τῶν εὔνων αὐτοῦ καὶ μεγαλοφώνων τῆς ἀληθείας κηρύκων; αὐτοῦ γάρ ἐστι τοῦ Δεσπότου φωνή· »Εἰ ἐμὲ ἐδίωξαν, καὶ ὑμᾶς διώξουσιν«. Ἔδει δὲ αὐτοὺς, εἰ καὶ μηδὲν ἕτερον, τοῦ χρόνου γοῦν αἰδεσθῆναι τὸ μῆκος, ἐν ᾧ τήνδε τὴν Ἐπιστολὴν ἐν ταῖς Ἐκκλησίαις ἀναγινώσκοντες διετέλεσαν τῆς Ἐκκλησίας οἱ τρόφιμοι. Ἐξ οὗ γὰρ τῶν ἀποστολικῶν γραμμάτων αἱ τοῦ Θεοῦ μετέλαχον Ἐκκλησίαι, ἐξ ἐκείνου καὶ τῆς πρὸς Ἑβραίους Ἐπιστολῆς τὴν ὠφέλειαν καρποῦνται. Εἰ δὲ μηδὲ τοῦτο ἱκανὸν πεῖσαι αὐτοὺς, Εὐσεβίῳ γοῦν ἔχρην πεισθῆναι τῷ Παλαιστινῷ, ὃν τῶν οἰκείων δογμάτων ἀποκαλοῦσι συνήγορον. Καὶ οὗτος γὰρ τοῦ θειοτάτου Παύλου τήνδε τὴν Ἐπιστολὴν

They who suffer from the Arian disease do not act admirably; raging against the apostolic letters, separating the letter to the Hebrews from the rest and calling it a bastard. For they, who use their tongue against our God and Savior, what would they not dare to do against his benevolent and impressive heralds of truth? For this is a word of the Lord: ‘If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you.’ They should, if nothing else, at least respect the length of time in which the nurslings of the church have continued to read this letter in the assemblies. From the time when the churches of God became partakers in the apostolic letters, from that time they have continued to reap the benefit also of the letter to the Hebrews. If this is not enough to persuade them, they should certainly be persuaded by Eusebius the Palestinian, whom they call a defender of their own doctrines. For also he admitted that this letter was by the most divine Paul, and he said that all the people of the past held

282

Appendix I

ὡμολόγησεν εἶναι, καὶ τοὺς παλαιοὺς ἅπαντας ταύτην περὶ αὐτῆς ἔφησεν ἐσχηκέναι τὴν δόξαν. Ἀλλ᾽ οὗτοι πᾶσιν ἐῤῥῶσθαι φράσαντες, ἀναίδην πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειαν διαμάχονται, τῆς ἀποστολικῆς θεολογίας, ᾗ τὸ προοίμιον κατεκόσμησε, τὴν αἴγλην οὐ φέροντες. Ἀντιλέγειν γὰρ οὐ δυνάμενοι πρὸς τὰ διαῤῥήδην περὶ τῆς τοῦ Μονογενοῦς εἰρημένα θεότητος, πᾶσαν ἐκβάλλειν ἐτόλμησαν τὴν Ἐπιστολὴν, καίτοι καὶ τῶν δογμάτων, καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἐνθυμημάτων, πολλὴν συγγένειαν πρὸς τὰς ἄλλας ἐχόντων Ἐπιστολάς. Πρόσχημα δὲ τῇ κατηγορίᾳ περιτιθέασι τὸ μὴ τὴν ἀποστολικὴν προσηγορίαν ὁμοίως ἐγκεῖσθαι τῷ προοιμίῳ. Ἔδει δὲ αὐτοὺς συνιδεῖν, ὡς τῶν ἐξ ἐθνῶν, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ τῶν ἐξ Ἰουδαίων πεπιστευκότων ἀπόστολος ἐκεχειροτόνητο. καὶ γὰρ ὁ Κύριος πρὸς αὐτὸν ἔφη· »Σπεῦσον, καὶ ἔξελθε τὸ τάχος ἐντεῦθεν· οὐ γὰρ μὴ προσδέξονταί σου τὴν μαρτυρίαν τὴν περὶ ἐμοῦ. Πορεύου, ὅτι εἰς ἔθνη μακρὰν ἐξαποστελῶ σε«. Τοιαύτας δὲ καὶ πρὸς τοὺς ἄλλους ἐποιήσατο συνθήκας. »Ἰάκωβος« γὰρ, φησὶ, »καὶ Κηφᾶς, καὶ Ἰωάννης, οἱ δοκουντες στῦλοι εἶναι, δεξιὰς ἔδωκαν ἐμοὶ καὶ Βαρνάβᾳ κοινωνίας, ἵνα αὐτοὶ μὲν εἰς τὴν περιτομὴν, ἡμεῖς δὲ εἰς τὰ ἔθνη«. Οὕτω καὶ Ῥωμαίοις ἐπιστέλλων ἔφη· »Ἐφ᾽ ὅσον εἰμὶ ἐγὼ ἐθνῶν ἀπόστολος, τὴν διακονίαν μου δοξάσω«. Τούτου δὴ χάριν τοῖς μὲν ἐξ ἐθνῶν πεπιστευκόσιν ἐπιστέλλων, καὶ τὴν προσηγορίαν προστέθεικε, καὶ τὴν ἀποστολικὴν ἀξίαν προστέθεικεν, ὡς διδάσκαλος μαθηταῖς ἐπιστέλλων. Ἑβραίοις δὲ γράφων, ὧν οὐκ ἐνεχειρίσθη τὴν ἐπιμέλειαν, γυμνὴν τῶν ἀξιωμάτων εἰκότως τὴν διδασκαλίαν προσήνεγκεν. Ὑπὸ γὰρ τὴν τῶν ἄλλων ἀποστόλων προμήθειαν ἐτέλουν. Ὅτι δὲ τῆς πνευματικῆς χάριτος ἀνάπλεως ἡ Ἐπιστολὴ, καὶ οὐδὲ τὴν τυχοῦσαν παρέχουσα διαβολῆς ἀφορμὴν, ἡ κατὰ μέρος ἑρμηνεία διδάξει σαφέστερον. Ἡ δὲ ὑπόθεσις τῆς ἐπιστολῆς ἐστιν αὕτη·

the same opinion regarding this letter. But they, having said good-bye to everything, fight without shame against the truth, as they cannot endure the splendor of the apostolic theology with which he adorned the prooemium. Since they were not able to refute what is said openly about the divinity of the only begotten, they dared to reject the entire letter, even if its doctrines and the other ideas are closely related to the other letters. They use as a pretext for their accusation that the apostolic name is not found in the prooemium. They should have considered that he was appointed apostle of the believers from the Gentiles and not of those from the Jews. For the Lord said to him: ‘Make haste, and get quickly out of here. For they will not receive your testimony concerning me. Depart! For I will send you far away to the Gentiles.’ And he made such agreements also with others. ‘For James’, he says, ‘and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship; they should go unto the circumcision, and we to the Gentiles.’ In this manner he spoke when he wrote to the Romans: ‘Inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify my office.’ For this reason; when he is writing to those from the Gentiles he both prefixed his name and the apostolic honor, as a teacher writing to his disciples. But when writing to the Hebrews, whose care was not entrusted to him, he rightly brought them the teaching stripped of his honors. They were cared for by the other apostles. The exposition of the letter section by section will teach us with greater clarity that the letter is full of spiritual grace and that it does not give any cause for the existing slandering. The argument of the letter is this: They who suffered from the disease of unbelief gave them all kinds of troubles. Writing to the Thessalonians, the divine Apostle mentioned their suffer-

[Theodoret: Arguments of the Pauline Letters. Text in PG 82.]

283

Τοὺς ἐξ Ἰουδαίων πεπιστευκότας οἱ ings: ‘For you’, he says, ‘became followers τὴν τῆς ἀπιστίας περικείμενοι νόσον, of the churches of God in Judaea. For you πολλοῖς καὶ παντοδαποῖς περιέβαλλον have also suffered like things of your own ἀλγεινοῖς. Τούτων δὲ τῶν παθημάτων tribesmen, just as they have of the Jews.’ καὶ Θεσσαλονικεῦσιν ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος And when he wrote to the Hebrews, he ἐπιστέλλων ἐμνήσθη. »Μιμηταὶ γὰρ«, φησὶν, added also this: ‘And you took joyfully the »ἐγενήθητε τῶν Ἐκκλησιῶν τοῦ Θεοῦ τῶν spoiling of your goods.’ And the blessed οὐσῶν ἐν τῇ Ἰουδαίᾳ· τὰ γὰρ αὐτὰ καὶ Luke teaches that before the call, the diὑμεῖς ἐπάθετε ὑπὸ τῶν ἰδίων συμφυλετῶν, vine Paul was destroying the church, enterκαθάπερ κἀκεῖνοι ὑπὸ τῶν Ἰουδαίων«. καὶ ing into the houses and dragging men and αὐτοῖς δὲ γράφων καὶ τοῦτο προστέθεικε· women he committed them to prison. Not »καὶ τὴν ἁρπαγὴν τῶν ὑπαρχόντων only did the unbelievers dare to do these ὑμῶν μεθ᾽ ἡδονῆς κατεδέξασθε«. καὶ ὁ things to the converts, but they also ridiμακάριος δὲ ἡμᾶς διδάσκει Λουκᾶς, ὡς culed them as people believing persistently πρὸ τῆς κλήσεως ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος in a dead man and as people who had left ἐλυμαίνετο τὴν Ἐκκλησίαν, κατὰ τοὺς the Law that was given by God. Therefore, οἴκους εἰσπορευόμενος, σύρων τε ἄνδρας the divine Apostle immediately, in the καὶ γυναῖκας παρεδίδου εἰς φυλακήν. Οὐ prooemium, shows that He was greater μόνον δὲ ταῦτα κατὰ τῶν πεπιστευκότων than all the prophets. Then, beginning to οἱ ἀπιστοῦντες ἐτόλμων, ἀλλὰ καὶ speak of His divinity, he declares that He ἐκωμῴδουν, ὡς ἀνθρώπῳ τεθνεῶτι is eternal, co-eternal with the Father, and πιστεύειν ἀνασχομένους, καὶ τὸν ὑπὸ the creator of all things. Then, having comΘεοῦ δεδομένον καταλελοιπότας νόμον. pared Him with the angels, he focuses on Τούτου δὴ χάριν ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος the divine Scripture that openly teaches εὐθὺς ἐν τῷ προοιμίῳ τῶν προφητῶν that He is Son and God, while they are serαὐτὸν ἁπάντων ἀποδείκνυσι κρείττονα. vants and creatures. From here, he shows Εἶτα τῆς θεολογίας ἀρξάμενος, ἀΐδιον that the things that were given from the ἀποφαίνει, καὶ τοῦ Πατρὸς συναΐδιον, καὶ Lord Christ are greater than the things that τῶν ἁπάντων δημιουργόν. Ἔπειτα τοῖς were brought through Moses. For he gave ἀγγέλοις παρεξετάσας, τὴν θείαν εἰς μέσον the Old Covenant, but He the New, which φέρει Γραφὴν, διαῤῥήδην διδάσκουσαν ὡς was promised through the prophets of old. ὁ μὲν ἔστιν Υἱὸς καὶ Θεὸς, οἱ δὲ λειτουργοὶ And he promised to give Palestine, but He καὶ ποιήματα. Ἐντεῦθεν δείκνυσιν ὡς τῶν the Kingdom of Heaven. He compares the διὰ Μωσέως παραχθέντων μείζονα τὰ priesthood after the order of Melchisedec παρὰ τοῦ Δεσπότου δεδομένα Χριστοῦ. with the Levitic, and shows that it is supeὉ μὲν γὰρ ἔδωκε τὴν Παλαιὰν Διαθήκην· rior. In addition to this, he shows that the ὁ δὲ τὴν Καινὴν, ἣν διὰ τῶν παλαιῶν OVSTMJOHT
PG
QJFUZ
o
CPUI
UIPTF
CFGPSF
UIF
προεπηγγείλατο προφητῶν. καὶ ὁ μὲν -BX
BOE
UIPTF
VOEFS
JU
o
XFSF
BENJSBCMF
ὑπέσχετο δώσειν τὴν Παλαιστίνην· ὁ δὲ He speaks both of the sufferings and the τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν οὐρανῶν. Συνκρίνει δὲ courage of those people, anointing them καὶ τῇ Λευιτικῇ ἱερωσύνῃ τὴν κατὰ τάξιν before the dangers. Then, having menΜελχισεδὲκ, καὶ δείκνυσι τὴν ὑπεροχήν. tioned his own struggles, exhorted them to πρὸς τούτοις καὶ τοὺς πρὸ νόμου καὶ stand bravely till the end, and added moral τοὺς ἐν νόμῳ τῆς εὐσεβείας τροφίμους exhortation to the doctrines, he ended the διὰ πίστεως ἀποφαίνει περιβλέπτους letter. He wrote it in the Hebrew language.

284

Appendix I

γεγενημένους. Λέγει δὲ αὐτῶν καὶ τὰ They say that it was translated by Clement. πάθη καὶ τὴν ἀνδρείαν, τούτους πρὸς Now, let us begin the exposition! τοὺς κινδύνους ἀλείφων. Εἶτα τῶν οἰκείων αὐτοὺς ἀναμνήσας ἀγώνων καὶ στῆναι μέχρι τέλους ἀνδρείως παρακαλέσας, καὶ τοῖς δογματικοῖς καὶ ἠθικὴν συνάψας παραίνεσιν, πεπλήρωκε τὴν Ἐπιστολήν. Γέγραφε δὲ αὐτὴν τῇ Ἑβραίων φωνῇ. ἑρμηνευθῆναι δὲ αὐτήν φασιν ὑπὸ Κλήμεντος. Ἡμεῖς δὲ λοιπὸν τῆς ἑρμηνείας ἁψώμεθα. ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG 82: 788A)

Argument [of 1 Timothy]

Λυκαὼν ὁ τρισμακάριος Τιμόθεος ἦν. Καταλιπὼν δὲ καὶ πατρίδα, καὶ οἰκίαν, καὶ τοὺς γεγεννηκότας, εἵπετο τῷ Ἀποστόλῳ, πάντων ὁμοῦ τὴν σὺν αὐτῷ διαγωγὴν προαιρούμενος. Τούτῳ τῆς Ἀσίας τὴν ἐπιμέλειαν ἐνεχείρισεν ὁ θεσπέσιος Παῦλος. Γράφει τοίνυν αὐτῷ, πρῶτον μὲν τοὺς τἀναντία διδάσκειν ἐπιχειροῦντας ἐπιστομίζειν παρακαλῶν· εἶτα τῆς ἐκκλησιαστικῆς αὐτὸν λειτουργίας ἐκπαιδεύων τὴν τάξιν· ἔπειτα καὶ τῶν ἱερατικῶν, καὶ μέντοι καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ταγμάτων τῆς πολιτείας τοὺς χαρακτῆρας ὑποδεικνύς. Προηγόρευσε δὲ καὶ τῶν δυσωνύμων αἱρετικῶν τὰ ὀλέθρια σπέρματα. Παρῄνεσε δὲ καὶ αὐτῷ ποιεῖν ἅπερ προσήκει ποιεῖν τὸν ψυχῶν κηδεμονίαν πεπιστευμένον.

The thrice-blessed Timothy was a Lycaonian. Having left his homeland, his house and his parents, he followed the Apostle, preferring life with him before everything else. The divine Paul entrusted Asia to his care. Therefore he writes to him, first exhorting him to make silent those who try to teach opposite doctrines. Then he teaches him about the arrangement of ecclesiastical service, showing both the characters of the sacred orders and also of the other orders of society. He predicted also the destructive seeds of the hated heretics. And he exhorted him to do what befits a man who has been entrusted with the care of souls.

ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG 82: 832A)

Argument [of 2 Timothy]

Ἀπὸ τῆς Ῥώμης τὴν δευτέραν τῷ From Rome, the divine Apostle wrote the τρισμακαρίῳ Τιμοθέῳ γέγραφεν Ἐπιστολὴν second letter to the thrice-blessed Timoὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος, παρ᾽ αὐτὸ λοιπὸν ὢν thy, being now close to the end of his life. τοῦ βίου τὸ τέλος. καὶ τοῦτο δεδήλωκεν And this he shows himself when he writes αὐτὸς ὡδὶ γεγραφώς· »Ἐγὼ ἤδη σπένδομαι, this: ‘For I am already on the point of being καὶ ὁ καιρὸς τῆς ἐμῆς ἀναλύσεως sacrificed; the time of my departure has ἐφέστηκεν«. Ἐπέστελλε δὲ αὐτῷ, drawn near.’ He wrote to him, inciting him παραθαρσύνων εἰς τοὺς περὶ τῆς εὐσεβείας for the battles about faith and exhorting ἀγῶνας, καὶ φέρειν γενναίως τοὺς ὑπὲρ τῆς him to endure the dangers for the sake of πίστεως κινδύνους παρακαλῶν. Ὑπέδειξε faith with courage. And he also showed the

[Theodoret: Arguments of the Pauline Letters. Text in PG 82.]

285

δὲ καὶ τῶν ἀγώνων τὰ ἆθλα. Προείρηκε δὲ καὶ περί τινων, τὸ μὲν πρόσχημα τῆς εὐσεβείας περικειμένων, ἀλλότριον δὲ τῆς ἐπαγγελίας βίον προαιρουμένων.

prizes of the battles. And he predicted regarding some that they will carry the guise of piety but prefer a life different from that of the promise.

ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ (PG 82: 857B)

Argument [of Titus]

Οὐκ ἠπειρώταις μόνοις ἀλλὰ καὶ Not only did the divine Apostle bring the νησιώταις ὁ θεῖος Ἀπόστολος τὴν teaching of salvation to people who were σωτήριον διδασκαλίαν προσήνεγκε, καὶ living on the mainland but also to those on πρὸς τοῖς ἄλλοις καὶ τὴν Κρήτην (νῆσος the islands, and, in addition to the others, δὲ αὕτη μεγίστη) τῷ φωτὶ τῆς θεογνωσίας also Crete, the largest island, he illuminatκατηύγασε. Τὰ δὲ τῆς εὐσεβείας καταπήξας ed with the light of knowledge of the divine. θεμέλια, τῷ τρισμακαρίῳ Τίτῳ τὴν λοιπὴν After he had laid the foundations of piety, οἰκονομίαν ἐπίστευσεν, ὃν πολλαῖς he entrusted the future administration to εὐφημίαις ἐν τοῖς πρὸς Κορινθίους the thrice-blessed Titus, to whom he had ἐταινίωσε γράμμασι. Γράφει δὲ αὐτῷ, given much praise in the letter to the Corπρῶτον μὲν διδάσκων ὁποίους εἶναι δεῖ inthians. He writes to him, first teaching τοῦ τὴν θείαν λειτουργίαν πεπιστευμένους. him how they should be who have been Εἶτα καί τινων ἐξ Ἰουδαίων πεπιστευκότων entrusted with the divine service. Then he κατηγορεῖ, παραφθείρειν ἐπιχειρούντων also accuses some of the believers from the τὸ σωτήριον κήρυγμα. Μέμνηται δὲ καὶ Jews who were trying to destroy the mesτῆς θείας οἰκονομίας, τὴν ταύτης αἰτίαν sage of salvation. He remembers also the ἐπιδεικνύς. divine plan, showing the reason behind it. ȊȆȅĬǼȈǿȈPG$

Argument [of Philemon]

τῶν πεπιστευκότων ὁ Φιλήμων ἐτύγχανεν ὤν· πόλιν δὲ εἶχε τὰς Κολασσάς. καὶ ἡ οἰκία δὲ αὐτοῦ μέχρι τοῦ παρόντος μεμένηκε. Τούτου οἰκέτης Ὀνήσιμος τοὔνομα, ὑφελόμενός τι καὶ ἀποδρὰς, εἴσω τῶν ἀποστολικῶν δικτύων ἐγένετο. ᾬκει δὲ κατ᾽ ἐκεῖνον τὸν καιρὸν τὸ ἐν Ῥώμῃ δεσμωτήριον, ὁ θεσπέσιος Παῦλος. Ἐκεῖ τοίνυν τοῦτον τοῦ σωτηρίου βαπτίσματος ἀξιώσας, ἀπέστειλε τῷ δεσπότῃ τήνδε γεγραφὼς τὴν Ἐπιστολήν. Ὁ δὲ οἰκέτου δραπέτου, καὶ μαστιγίου, καὶ λωποδύτου μὴ ἀμελήσας, ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς πνευματικῆς αὐτὸν διδασκαλίας ἀξιώσας τῆς σωτηρίας, τίνος ἂν ἠμέλησε πώποτε;

Philemon was one of the converts. Colossae was his hometown, and his house remains to the present day. His servant, Onesimus by name, had stolen something and run away, and came into the apostolic nets. At that time the divinely inspired Paul stayed in prison in Rome. There he deemed him worthy of the baptism of salvation, and, having written this letter, sent him back to his master. He who did not neglect a runaway slave, a scoundrel and a thief, but deemed him worthy of salvation UISPVHI
TQJSJUVBM
JOTUSVDUJPO
o
XPVME
IF
ever have neglected anyone?

286

Appendix I

4. Theophylact’s Arguments [Theophylact: Arguments of the Letters of Paul. Text in Migne, PG
o>

Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Ῥωμαίους Ἐπιστολῆς (PG 124: 336AB)

Argument of the Letter to the Romans

Ἡ συνεχὴς ἀνάγνωσις τῶν θείων Γραφῶν The continuous study of the sacred scripεἰς τὴν γνῶσιν αὐτῶν ἄγει· ἀψευδὴς γὰρ tures leads to an understanding of them. ὁ εἰπών· »Ζητεῖτε καὶ εὑρήσετε, κρούετε For he who said this was without lie: καὶ ἀνοιγήσεται ὑμῖν«. καὶ τῶν Ἐπιστολῶν ‘Seek and you will find, knock and it will τοίνυν τοῦ μακαρίου Παύλου τὰ μυστήρια be opened to you’. Thus, we will learn μαθησόμεθα, συνεχῶς αὐταῖς καὶ ἐμμελῶς the mysteries also from the Letters of the ἐντυγχάνοντες· τῶν γὰρ ἄλλων ἁπάντων blessed Paul, if we read them continuἐπλεονέκτησε τῷ τῆς διδασκαλίας λόγῳ. ously and diligently. Because he was above καὶ εἰκότως· ἐπειδὴ γὰρ περισσότερον all the others with regard to the word of πάντων ἐκοπίασε, δαψιλεστέραν καὶ τὴν UFBDIJOH
o
BOE
XJUI
HPPE
SFBTPO
#FDBVTF
τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐπεσπάσατο χάριν. καὶ οὐ his toil was more abundant than that of the μόνον ἀπὸ τῶν Ἐπιστολῶν τοῦτο δῆλον, others, he received a richer grace from the ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν Πράξεων. Ἑρμῆς γὰρ Spirit. And this is clear not only from the ἐνομίσθη παρὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις, διὰ τὸ τοῦ Letters but also from the Acts. For he was λόγου καταρχεῖν. Πρόκειται δὲ ἡμῖν Πρώτη considered to be Hermes by the unbelievἡ πρὸς Ῥωμαίους, οὐκ ἐπειδὴ πρώτη αὕτη ers, because of his excellence of speech. ἐγράφη· καὶ γὰρ πρὸ αὐτῆς εἰσὶν αἱ πρὸς As the first letter, that to the Romans lies Κορινθίους δύο. καὶ πρὸ τούτων αὖ ἡ before us, not because it was written first. πρὸς Θεσσαλονικεῖς, ἐν ᾗ περὶ τῆς εἰς For the two letters to the Corinthians are τὰ Ἰεροσόλυμα πεμπομένης διακονίας prior to this. And, again, before those ἐπαινῶν αὐτοὺς αἰνίττεται· ἀλλὰ καὶ ἡ πρὸς are the letter to the Thessalonians, where Γαλάτας προτέρα ἐστὶ ταύτης τῆς πρὸς he, praising them, refers to the collection Ῥωμαίους. τῶν μέντοι ἄλλων Ἐπιστολῶν which was sent to Jerusalem. But also the προτέρα αὕτη, ἡ πρὸς Ῥωμαίους, φημί. letter to the Galatians is earlier than this Πῶς οὖν πρώτη τέτακται; Ὅτι παρὰ τῇ to the Romans. Still, this letter, to the RoΓραφῇ ἡ τοιαύτη τάξις οὐκ ἀναγκαία. καὶ mans, is before the other letters. Why is γὰρ καὶ οἱ δώδεκα προφῆται, οὐκ ἐφεξῆς it then placed first? Because in Scripture, ὄντες ἀλλήλους κατὰ τοὺς χρόνους, ἀλλὰ there is no need to follow such a sequence: πολλῷ διεστηκότες ἀλλήλων, ὅμως ἐν τῇ The Twelve Prophets, who did not follow τῶν βιβλίων τάξει ἐφεξῆς εἰσι κείμενοι. each other chronologically but were livΓράφει δὲ Ῥωμαίοις ὁ Παῦλος οἷα δὴ χρέος ing in quite different periods still appear ἔχων λειτουργὸς εἶναι Χριστοῦ, καὶ ὡς as a continuous sequence in the order of προκαθημένοις τῆς οἰκουμένης. Ὁ γὰρ the books. And Paul writes to the Romans




289

Τιμόθεον, ἡγνίσατο δὲ αὐτὸς κατὰ τὸν sary, even he yielded and he circumcised νόμον. Ἀλλ᾽ οἱ ἀπατεῶνες οὐ λέγοντες Timothy and he purified himself according τὰς αἰτίας, δι᾽ ἃς καὶ οἱ περὶ Πέτρον καὶ to the Law. But the impostors, not giving αὐτοὶ ταῦτα ἐποίουν, παρελογίζοντο τοὺς the reasons why they and those around ἀφελεστέρους, καὶ αὐτὸ μέντοι τοῦτο εἰς Peter did these things, were deceiving the διαβολὴν Παύλου προέφερον, τὸ ποτὲ simple ones, and they even brought this as μὲν περιτέμνειν, ποτὲ δὲ ἀναιρεῖν τὴν a charge against Paul, that he sometimes περιτομὴν, καὶ ἄλλοτε ἄλλα κηρύσσειν· practiced circumcision, sometimes abolκαὶ ἐπὶ πᾶσιν, ὡς οὐ δεῖ Παύλῳ πείθεσθαι, ished circumcision, preaching different ὃς οὔτε Χριστὸν εἶδεν, οὔτε αὐτοῦ ἐστι things at different times, and, in addition μαθητὴς, ἀλλὰ τῶν ἀποστόλων· τοὺς δὲ to all this, that one should not obey Paul, περὶ Πετρον ὡς αὐτόπτας προσδέχεσθαι. who had not seen Christ or been a disciple Διὰ ταῦτα τοίνυν διακαὴς τὴν ψυχὴν, of Christ, but of the Apostles. But they συντίθησι τὴν Ἐπιστολήν· καὶ πρῶτόν γε around Peter should be accepted as eyewitπρὸς ἐκεῖνο ἀποτείνεται, ὃ ἐκεῖνοι ἔλεγον nesses. Being enraged in his soul because διορύττοντες αὐτοῦ τὴν ὑπόληψιν, ὅτι of these things, he composes the letter. οἱ μὲν ἄλλοι τοῦ Χριστοῦ, αὐτὸς δὲ τῶν And first he addresses what they said who ἀποστόλων ἐστι μαθητής· διὸ καὶ οὕτως XFSF
VOEFSNJOJOH
IJT
SFQVUBUJPO
o
UIBU
ἄρχεται. the others were disciples of Christ but he himself a disciple of the apostles. Therefore he also begins as follows… Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Εφεσίους Ἐπιστολῆς (PG 124: 1033AB)

Argument of the Letter to the Ephesians

Ἔφεσος μητρόπολις μέν ἐστι τῆς Ἀσίας· Ephesus was the chief city of Asia. It honἐσέβετο δὲ τὴν Ἄρτεμιν, ἧς καὶ ναὸς ἦν ἐν ored Artemis, and her largest and most αὐτῇ κάλλιστος καὶ μέγιστος, τιμώμενος, beautiful shrine was found there, honored καὶ παρὰ πάντων μὲν Ἑλλήνων, μάλιστα by all Greeks, but especially by Ephesus δὲ παρὰ τῆς Ἐφέσου, ὥστε καὶ νεωκόρον itself, so that the city also was called “the τῆς Ἀρτέμιδος λέγεσθαι ταύτην, ὡς worshipper of Artemis”, as it is written in ἐν ταῖς Πράξεσι γέγραπται. Ἐν Ἐφέσῳ Acts. In Ephesus, John the evangelist stayed δὲ ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς Ἰωάννης τὰ πολλὰ for a long time, and, having been in exile, διέτριψεν, ἐξορισθεὶς ἐκεῖσε, ἔνθα καὶ he also ended his life there. And Paul left τελευτᾷ. καὶ Τιμόθεον ἐκεῖ κατέλιπεν ὁ Timothy there as a teacher. The most faΠαῦλος διδάσκαλον· τῶν τε φιλοσόφων mous philosophers lived in this city. Since οἱ μάλιστα ἀνθήσαντες ἐν ταύτῃ διῆγον. the city was so religious and had a multiἘπεὶ οὖν δεισιδαίμων τε ἦν οὕτως ἡ πόλις, tude of wise people, Paul spends great efκαὶ οὕτω σοφοῖς ἐκόμα, πολλῇ σπουδῇ fort in writing to them, and he entrusted to κέχρηται Παῦλος πρὸς τοὺς τοιούτους them deeper and higher thoughts, as they γράφων, καὶ τὰ βαθύτερα δὲ τῶν νοημάτων were already educated. He writes the letκαὶ ὑψηλότερα αὐτοῖς ἐπίστευσεν, ἅτε ter, which is full of sublime thoughts, from κατηχημένοις ἤδη. Γράφει δὲ τὴν τῶν Rome, as a prisoner. We also need to be ὑπερόγκων νοημάτων ταύτην γέμουσαν very attentive in order to understand the Ἐπιστολὴν ἀπὸ Ῥώμης δεδεμένος. Δεῖ mysteries contained in it.

290

Appendix I

οὖν καὶ ἡμῖν πολλῆς τῆς προσοχῆς πρὸς κατανόησιν τῶν ἐν ταύτῃ μυστηρίων. Ὑπόθεσις τῆς πρὸς Φιλιππησίους Ἐπιστολῆς (PG

"#o"

Argument of the letter to the Philippians

Οἱ Φιλιππήσιοι ἀπὸ πόλεώς εἰσι μιᾶς τῶν ἐν The Philippians are from one of the PhilipΜακεδονίᾳ Φιλίππων, οὕτω καλουμένης pian cities in Macedonia, so called from ἀπὸ τοῦ οἰκιστοῦ, ὑπὸ μητρόπολιν τότε its founder, and they were paying tribute Θεσσαλονίκην τελοῦντες. Πολλὰ δὲ to Thessalonice, which was then the chief αὐτοῖς χρηστὰ ὁ Παῦλος μαρτυρεῖ. Ἐν city. Paul bears witness to their many good δεσμοῖς δὲ ὢν ἔγραψε τὴν Ἐπιστολήν· deeds, writing the letter to them while in μετὰ γὰρ τὴν πρώτην ἀπολογίαν, ἧς prison. For after his first defense, which is ἐμνήσθη ἐν τῇ πρὸς Τιμόθεον, αὖθις ἐδέθη. mentioned in the letter to Timothy, he was Ἦσαν δὲ οἱ Φιλιππήσιοι δι᾽ Ἐπαφροδίτου again arrested. The Philippians had sent πέμψαντες αὐτῷ τὰ πρὸς τὴν χρείαν· ἅμα him what he needed through Epaphrodiδὲ καὶ γνῶναι θέλοντες τὰ κατ᾽ αὐτόν. tus; at the same time they also wanted to Ἐπεὶ δὲ εἰκὸς ἦν αὐτοὺς θορυβηθῆναι know his affairs. Since it was reasonable ἀκούσαντας ὡς ἐδέδετο ὁ διδάσκαλος, to expect that they were troubled having αὐτὸ τοῦτο γράφει αὐτοῖς, διδάσκων ὅτι heard that their teacher was in prison, he τὰ δεσμὰ οὐ θορυβεῖν αὐτοὺς ὀφείλει, writes even this to them; that they should ἀλλὰ χαρὰν προξενεῖν, διὰ τὸ ὑπὲρ not trouble themselves, but rather rejoice, Χριστοῦ εἶναι. Συμβουλεύει δὲ αὐτοῖς because this was for the sake of Christ. He καὶ περὶ ὁμονοίας καὶ ταπεινοφροσύνης. also gives them advice about concord and Καθάπτεται δὲ καὶ τῶν Ἰουδαίων, τῶν ἐν humility. He also speaks disparagingly προσχήματι Χριστιανισμοῦ τῷ δόγματι of those Jews who under the pretext of λυμαινομένων, καὶ κύνας αὐτοὺς καλεῖ, Christianity were making havoc with their καὶ κακοὺς ἐργάτας. Διαλέγεταί τε αὐτοῖς teaching, and he calls them dogs and wickπολλὰ περὶ ἠθῶν. Μέμνηται δὲ συνετῶς ed workers. And he speaks much to them καὶ τῶν πεμφθέντων χρειωδῶν. Φαίνεται about morals. He also wisely mentions the δὲ μετὰ τιμῆς αὐτοῖς διαλεγόμενος· καὶ things they have sent to meet his needs, γὰρ πολλὴν ἀρετὴν ἐπεδείξαντο καὶ and he appears to speak honorably with ἐπιτηδειότητα εἰς τὴν πίστιν. Ἐνταῦθα ἦν ἡ them, for they had shown great virtue and πορφυροπῶλις· ἐνταῦθα ὁ ἀρχισυνάγωγος zeal for faith. There was the woman who ἐπίστευσεν· ἐνταῦθα ὁ Παῦλος μαστιχθεὶς was selling purple. There, the chief ruler of μετὰ τοῦ Σίλα καθείρχθη· ἐνταῦθα ὁ the synagogue believed. There, Paul, havδεσμοφύλαξ ἀπὸ ἑνὸς σημείου προσῆλθε ing beaten together with Silas, was put in Χριστῷ μετὰ τῆς οἰκίας ὅλης· ἐνταῦθα οἱ prison. There, because of one sign, the στρατηγοὶ ἐφοβήθησαν τὸν Παῦλον, καὶ keeper of the prison came unto Christ ἠξίωσαν ἐξελθεῖν· καὶ ὅλως λαμπρὰν ἔσχε with his entire house. There, the magisτὸ κήρυγμα τὴν ἀρχήν· καὶ ταῦτα ἀπὸ τῶν trates were terrified of Paul and asked him Πράξεων μανθάνομεν. Προσμαρτυρεῖ δὲ to leave. And in every way, the preaching αὐτοῖς ὁ Παῦλος οὐ μόνον πίστιν ὀρθὴν had a brilliant beginning, and these things καὶ κινδύνους, ἀλλὰ καὶ εὐμετάδοτον we learn from Acts. And Paul testifies not only to their right faith and the dangers,





*U
JT
OPU
DMFBS
UP
XIBU
UIF
UFSN
ɀϟϮϟцϫϣϯϧ϶
IFSF
SFGFST
o
PS
o
PS
QFSIBQT
UIF
XIPMF
MFUUFS
CFDBVTF
+PIO
EPFT
OPU
JOEJDBUF
JU
JO
EJSFDU
DPOUSBTU
UP
UIF
FYQMJDJU
scope of the apologetic references cited above).” (ibid. 353 and see further ibid. 354 note 90; see also above note 29).

Parainesis — paraineo — parainetikos as Genre-Designation

317

The lection-list divides the letter into two lections, but the second lection starts already at 3:15 and thus gives no indication as to whether a paraenetic section is intended or not. (b) In addition to what has just been said about the περί- and ὅτι-sentences on a lower level of abstraction in the first part and the sub-indicators (ἀποτροπὴ ἀπό …; προτροπὴ πρός …) of the second part of the letter, it should be noted that they are all asyndetically constructed as in the chapter-lists previously discussed. (c) There is no general agreement among modern commentators as to where in Galatians the paraenetic section begins. Among recent commentators Hans Dieter Betz and a few others99 let the exhortatio-section begin already in 5:1 just as we understand CAP 761 to do, while 'SBOÎPJT
7PVHB
BOE
NPTU
PUIFST
TFF
UIF
TFDUJPO
o
BT
i"VČPSEFSVOH
und Ausführung der These des Briefes: Die Adressaten sollen in der Freiheit bleiben” and consequently let the paraenetic section begin in 5:13 just as Zacagni does, who, however, uses “description” (ὑπογραφή) and not “exhortation” (παραίνεσις).100 Dieter KremenEBIM
UFSNT
o
Peroratio
o
TFDPOE
Exordium
o
Paraenesis.101 Bjerkelund points out that no παρακαλῶ-phrase is to be found in Galatians and further that the only one that comes close to a παρακαλῶ-phrase in regard to content and function is 4:12.102 +POBT
)PMNTUSBOE
JO
IJT
TVNNBSZ
SFHBSET
o
BT
iUIF
GPVSUI
BOE
MBTU
NBKPS
TFDUJPO
of the Letter to the Galatians”, within which “a lengthy paraenetic section (5:13b-6:10)” is inserted; in his arrangement of the text, however, Holmstrand lets the fourth major section begin already in 4:12 which he names “Exhortation”.103 John Barclay and Matthias Konradt both stresses that “these verses are not an independent or dispassionate account of Christian ethics tacked on to the end of an argumentative letter, but a continuation and completion of the argument.”104 (G) In the chapter-list (CAP 760) to 2 Corinthians we find another example of a chapterlist which lacks an overarching lexeme or syntagma but merely provides a general indication of the content: ὁ πᾶς λόγος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ ἐπιστολῇ περί τε ἑαυτοῦ, καὶ περὶ Κορινθίων 99

H. D. Betz

oo
idem 1979, 22f., 253ff.: “The parenetical section of Galatians can be subdivided into three parts. Each of these parts is recognizable by its restatement of the ‘indicative’ of TBMWBUJPO

o
CFHJOT
XJUI
UIJT
SFTUBUFNFOU
B
BOE
DPOUBJOT
B
XBSOJOH
BHBJOTU
UBLJOH
VQ
UIF
ZPLF
PG
UIF
+FXJTI
5PSBI
BOE
BDDFQUJOH
UIF
SJUVBM
PG
DJSDVNDJTJPO

o
CFHJOT
BHBJO
XJUI
UIJT
SFTUBUFNFOU

BOE
DPOUBJOT
B
XBSOJOH
BHBJOTU
DPSSVQUJPO
CZ
UIF
AĘFTI

o
CFHJOT
XJUI
B
ĕOBM
restatement of the ‘indicative’ of salvation (5:25a) and contains a series of gnomic sentences forming the positive exhortation.” Similarly T. W. Martin 1995, 454: “Paul’s exhortation in 5:1 … describes the agitators’ pre-Christian state, not the Galatians’”; cf. also W. Schmithals 1988, 418f.; Brown 1997, 468, 473; B. Gärtner 1998, 26; Koester 2000, 125; Popkes 1996, 88.

100 F. Vouga 1998, 127ff.; J. L. Martyn 1997, 468: “For three reasons 5:13 is the far more likely answer”: (a) 5:1 is the conclusion of the section begun at 4:20; (b) 5:2 signals a new turn in the argument; (c) “Most imQPSUBOU
UIFSF
BSF
OP
JNQFSBUJWF
BOE
IPSUBUPSZ
WFSCT
JO
o
XIFSFBT
B
OVNCFS
PG
TVDI
WFSCT
QVODUVBUF
UIF
MBUUFS
QBSU
PG
ow
$G
BMTP
R. Bring 1958, 262ff.; Vielhauer 1975, 112; Schlier 1962, 241ff.; J. Becker 1998, 83ff.; Klauck 1998, 237. 101 D. Kremendahl

9o9*
o
o 102 Bjerkelund 1967, 177. 103 Holmstrand 1997, 193f. and 199ff. 104 J. Barclay 1988, 143; Konradt

o
4P
BMTP
Hellholm 2003, 173.

318

Appendix II

καὶ τῶν ψευδαποστόλων. Nevertheless, a substitution on meta-level of the second degree that reflects paraenetic language is provided and reads: Προτροπὴ πρὸς ἐπίδοσιν χρημάτων τοῖς ἁγίοις, καὶ τιμὴν τῶν διὰ τοῦτο ἐρχομένων.

(8:1)

Encouragement to give money to the saints, and to respect those coming for this purpose.

We can make the following observations in regard to this admonition: (a) In the chapter-list of 2 Corinthians we encounter the following substitutions on meta-level: εὐχαριστία, ἀποδοχή, παρασκευή, διήγησις in addition to seven περί-phrases. The term παραίνεσις does not occur, but precisely at the beginning of the collectionchapters, that is, in chapter 8 the term προτροπή is used. The next text-delimitation occurs only at 10:1, that is directly following upon the two collection-chapters 8 and 9; the delimitation marker here is another substitution on meta-level, namely, διήγησις, which means that the two collection-chapters 8 and 9 evidently are taken as a unity. In view of the usage of lexemes it is especially illuminating to observe that the chapter-list ignores the Pauline usage in 10:1 of the verbs παρακαλέω and δέομαι.105 (b) A sub-division is indicated not at 9:1 but at 8:16, where Titus’ and others’ mission is mentioned: Ἐν ᾧ περὶ τῆς Τίτου ἀποστολῆς, καὶ τῶν ἄλλων πρὸς αὐτούς. (c) In his commentary on 2 Corinthians 8 and 9 Hans Dieter Betz interprets the function of the exemplum of the churches in Macedonia and their activities as an “indirect appeal” to the addressees.106 This functional characterization comes close to the one given in CAP 760 (προτροπή) but contrary to Euthalius’ understanding of the two collection-chapters as one unit.107 Betz divides the two collection-chapters into separate letters, one to Corinth and the other to the churches in Achaia.108 Margaret Mitchell also divides the two into separate letters but regards chapter 8 as the first letter following upon 1 Corinthians and chapter 9 as the very last in Paul’s correspondence with the Corinthian Church.109 Once more it becomes clear that ancient and modern text-delimitations and -descriptions are rather congruent especially as far as paraenesis is concerned. (H) In the chapter-list (CAP 773) to 2 Thessalonians we find yet another example of a list lacking overarching lexemes or syntagmata but nevertheless providing substitutions on meta-level of the second degree reflecting paraenetic language. In full it reads as follows: Εὐχαριστία τῆς κλήσεως. Ἐν ᾧ προτροπὴ ἐπὶ ὑπομονῇ. Εὐχὴ πρὸς θεὸν καὶ Χριστὸν περὶ στηριγμοῦ αὐτῶν.

(2:13) (2:15) (2:16)

Thanksgiving for the calling. In which (there is) encouragement to steadfastness. Prayer to God and Christ for their sustenance.

105 Cf. Bjerkelund

o

D. Lührmann 1986, 302; L. Aejmelaeus

o 106 Betz 1985, 41f.; so also V. P. Furnish 1984, 398, 408f.; cf. H. Windisch 1924/70, 243: “ethisch-religiöse Paränese”. 107 Thus also Furnish, ibid., 41ff., 429ff. 108 Betz
JCJE


BOE
o
$G
BMSFBEZ
Windisch, ibid., 286ff. 109 Mitchell

o
FTQ
o

Parainesis — paraineo — parainetikos as Genre-Designation

Παράκλησις εὐχῆς ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἔργου.

319

(3:1)

Exhortation to prayer for him [sc. Paul] and his work.

(3:5)

In which (there is) prayer for them [sc. the Thessalonians] to obtain the love of God.

Προτροπὴ ἐργασίας, καὶ παραιτήσεως τῶν ἀργῶν καὶ περιέργων.

(3:6)

Encouragement to work and refusal to have dealings with idle and vain people.

Εὐχὴ περὶ εἰρήνης τῆς παρὰ θεοῦ.

(3:16)

Prayer for peace from God.

Ἐν ᾧ εὐχὴ ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν εἰς ἀγάπην θεοῦ.

The complicated structure of this outline in the chapter-list is in need of a detailed comment: (a) As in most outlines of Pauline letters in the Euthalian chapter-lists there are no overarching substitutions on meta-level of a first degree (that is παραίνεσις) in this list either. Differently, however, from other lists with substitutions on meta-level of a second degree (προτροπή and/or ἀποτροπή), we here encounter two προτροπή-sentences (2:15 and 3:6), between which one παράκλησις-phrase (3:1) is inserted. Intercalated among these are further three εὐχή-phrases (2:16, 3:5, and 3:16). This, of course, makes it difficult to determine whether the chapter-list actually reckons with one continuous paraenetic section or not, and if not, where the paraenesis actually begins. Of importance is further the observation that in CAP 773 the first προτροπή-phrase at 2:15 is regarded as a sub-section of the εὐχαριστία-section beginning at 2:13, while the second προτροπήphrase at 3:6 is an independent clause. (b) The two προτροπή-phrases are differently constructed: the first in form of a prepositional phrase in 2:15, the second in form of a cum genitivo rei construction in 3:6 as is also the case with the παράκλησις-phrase at 3:1. (c) The difficulty in determining the extension of the paraenetical sequence(s) is also reflected in modern commentaries. According to Ernst von Dobschütz and Eckhart Reinmuth the paraenetic section ending the letter-body begins in 3:1 and ends in 3:16/18,110 and according to Philipp Vielhauer the admonitions start in 3:6 and end in 3:16.111 Most interesting in view of the chapter-list’s usage of the two προτροπή-phrases (2:15 and 3:6), however, is the fact that, as an exception among commentators, Wolfgang 5SJMMJOH
WJFXT
o
BT
POF
JOUFHSBUFE
IPSUBUPSZTFRVFODF112 He furthermore observes the singular “Verbindung von Ermahnung und Gebetswunsch”, which in this form does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament.113 Willi Marxsen does not give a structural analysis of the text as a whole and consequently does not explicitly see one 110 E. von Dobschütz 1909/74, 305ff.; E. Reinmuth 1998b, 185ff. 111 Vielhauer 1975, 90 . 112 W. Trilling


i%JF
;VTBNNFO[JFIVOH
EFS
"CTDIOJUUF
JO
 o
[V
einem dritten Teil im Brief ist ungewöhnlich und bisher nicht vorgeschlagen und praktiziert worden”. Although Malherbe 2000, 359 and 439ff. is of the same opinion as Trilling that the (Malherbe: second) exhortation section begins at 2:15 there is, as far as we can see, no reference to Trilling. Malherbe, however, ends the paraenetic section XJUI

BOE
UFSNT
UIF
TFDUJPO
o
i$PNNBOETw
JCJE

BOE
Č  113 Trilling, ibid., 126.

320

Appendix II

unitary sequence of a hortatory character.114
/FWFSUIFMFTT
IF
UFSNT
o
i7FSTDIJFEFOF
&SNBIOVOHFOw
o
i%JF
u6OPSEFOUMJDIFOAw
BOE
DIBSBDUFSJ[FT
UIJT
TFDUJPO
BT
i&SNBIOVOHw
BOE
ĕOBMMZ
o
i;VTBNNFOGBTTVOH
EFS
&SNBIOVOHFOw115 The complexity of the structure of 2 Thessalonians becomes evident also in the outlines given by Udo Schnelle in his Introduction,116 and Hans-Josef Klauck in his overview of ancient letterwriting and the New Testament.117 Both divide the text at 2:13 as does CAP 773. (I) Astonishing in view of the assessment by modern commentators118 is the realization that none of the substitutions on meta-level on the first or even on the second level that we have encountered so far (παραίνεσις or προτροπή, ἀποτροπή respectively) is to be found in the chapter-list to 1 Corinthians (CAP 753, 756).119 We can furthermore discern that the lexeme παρακαλέω that is used in 1:10, 4:16, and 16:15 does not occur in the chapter-list and that a delimitation in the chapter-list is made only at 1:10 without using any technical terminology120. However, after the introductory notice: Περὶ πλειόνων καὶ διαϕόρων ἡ Επιστολὴ διόρθωσιν ἔχουσα τῶν Κορινθίοις ἡμαρτημένων.

(1:10)

Regarding the many and various sins among the Corinthians this letter brings corrections. (incipit)

and the generic characterization of the exordium by means of the phrase μετὰ τὸ προοίμιον, there follows a series of altogether 23 περί-phrases and one κατά-phrase. It is in our opinion conceivable that the term διόρθωσις121 here is used either as a stronger variant of the commonly used terms for exhortation covering the entire First letter to the Corinthians or as a different epistolary genre-designation likewise encompassing the intact letter. The last option is all the more likely, since διόρθωσις here occurs in direct connection with ἡμαρτημένα as is the case also in Ps-Demetrios, Τύποι Ἐπιστολικοί in the description of “The censorious letter type” (no. 6 Ἐπιτιμητικός”).122 Compare also the usage of the verb παραινέω in the previous letter-type called “The consoling type” (no. 5 114 W. Marxsen 1982, 102: “Da der Verfasser seit 2:13 seine Ausführungen nicht nach einem bestimmten 1MBO
HFTUBMUFU
VOE
EJF
"VTMFHVOH
WPO
 o
[FJHUF
EB•
FS
TFJOF
(FEBOLFO
FSTU
CFJN
/JFEFSTDISFJCFO
entwickelt, erweist sich jede Gliederung als nachträglich an das Ganze herangetragen”. 115 Marxsen, ibid., 89ff., 98ff., 102f. 116 Schnelle


i o 
%BOL
GàS
EJF
&SXÊIMVOH
EFS
(FNFJOEF
.BIOVOH
VOE
'àSCJUUF
 o
Spezielle Anweisungen”. 117 Klauck

G
i$
;XFJUFS
)BVQUUFJM
%BOL
.BIOVOH
(FCFU
o w 118 H. Conzelmann

o
S. K. Stowers 1986, 96; W. Schrage 1991, 87ff.; Schnelle 2002, 80; Klauck 1998, 232. 119 Only in the Argumenta-section is παραινετικοὶ λόγοι used, but only for a single verse; see, however, below page 338. Cf. Lindemann 2000, 15ff.: The theme is the ἐκκλησία and its οἰκοδομή. 120 Regarding the usage of παρακαλέω in 1 Corinthians, see Bjerkelund 1967, 141ff. and D. Lührmann 
o
Thiselton

o


Collins, J. J. 1994

Daniel. A Commentary on the Book of Daniel (Hermeneia; Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress).

Conte, M.-E. 1992

‘Deixis textuelle et Deixis am Phantasma’, in S. R. Anschütz (ed.), Texte, Sätze, Wörter und Moneme: Festschrift für Klaus Heger zum 65. Geburtstag
)FJEFMCFSH
0SJFOUWFSMBH 
o

Conybeare, F. C. 1895

‘On the Codex Pamphili and the Date of Euthalius’, in Journal of Philology 
o

Conybeare, F. C. 1904

‘The date of Euthalius’, in ZNW

o

Conzelmann, H. 1975

1 Corinthians. A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians (Hermeneia; Philadelphia, Pa: Fortress).

Conzelmann, H. 1981

Der erster Brief an die Korinther (KEK 5; 2nd ed., Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).

Conzelmann, H. 1987

Acts of the Apostles (Hermeneia; Philadelphia, Pa: Fortress).

352

Bibliography

Conzelmann, H./ Lindemann, A. 1988

Arbeitsbuch zum Neuen Testament (UTB 52; 9th ed.; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).

Conzelmann, H./ Lindemann, A. 1995

Arbeitsbuch zum Neuen Testament (UTB 52; 11th ed.; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).

Coseriu, E. 1988

Einführung in die allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft (UTB 1372; Tübingen: Franke).

Coseriu, E. 1994

Textlinguistik. Eine Einführung (UTB 1808; Tübingen: Franke).

Coseriu, E. 2003

Geschichte der Sprachphilosophie. Von den Anfängen bis Rousseau (UTB 2266; Tübingen: Franke).

Courtney, E. 2003

The Fragmentary Latin Poets (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

Crisp, S. 2005

‘Scribal Marks and Logical Paragraphs: discourse segmentation criteria in manuscripts of the Pauline corpus’, in P. A. Noss (ed.) Current Trends in Scripture Translation: Definitions and Identity 6#4
#VMMFUJO
 
o

Cropp, M. J. 1988

Euripides Electra (Oxford: Aris & Phillips).

Cross, F. L. 1954

1 Peter: A Paschal Liturgy (London: Mowbray).

Dahl, N. A. 1951

‘›A New and Living Way‹: The Approach to God According to )FCSFXT
o
JO
Int.
o

Dahl, N. A. 1954

‘Formgeschichtliche Beobachtungen zur Christusverkündigung in der Gemeindepredigt’, in W. Eltester (ed.) Neutestamentliche Studien für Rudolf Bultmann
#FSMJO
5ÚQFMNBOO 
o

Dahl, N. A. 1978/2000

‘The Origin of the Earliest Prologues to the Pauline Letters’, in %BIM

o