The Wandering Holy Man: The Life of Barsauma, Christian Asceticism, and Religious Conflict in Late Antique Palestine 0520304144, 9780520304147

Table of contents :
Cover
The Wandering Holy Man
Title
Copyright
CONTENTS
List of Illustrations
Acknowledgments
Introduction
1. Barsauma and the Emperors
2. Ascetic History and Rhetoric in the Life of Barsauma
3. Barsauma’s Travels to the Holy Land and Jewish History
4. Barsauma, Eudocia, Jerusalem, and the Temple Mount
5. Cleansing the Sacred Space: The Holy Land and Its Inhabitants in the Pilgrimage Narrative of Barsauma
6. “It is not lawful for Samaritans to have dealings with Christians!” Samaritans in the Life of Barsauma
7. Wandering Monks Remembered: Hagiography in the Lives of Alexander the Sleepless and Barsauma the Mourner
Conclusion: Barsauma between Hagiography and History
Appendix: The Life of Barsauma
Bibliography
List of Contributors
Index

Citation preview

The Wandering holy man The life of Barsauma, Christian Asceticism, and Religious Conflict in Late Antique Palestine

edited by Johannes hahn and Volker menze

UniVersiT Y of California Press

TransformaTion of The ClassiCal heriTage Peter Brown, general editor i. Art and Ceremony in Late Antiquity, by sabine g. macCormack ii. Synesius of Cyrene: Philosopher-Bishop, by Jay alan Bregman iii. Theodosian Empresses: Women and Imperial Dominion in Late Antiquity, by Kenneth g. holum iV. John Chrysostom and the Jews: Rhetoric and Reality in the Late Fourth Century, by robert l. Wilken V. Biography in Late Antiquity: The Quest for the Holy Man, by Patricia Cox Vi. Pachomius: The Making of a Community in Fourth-Century Egypt, by Philip rousseau Vii. Change in Byzantine Culture in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries, by a. P. Kazhdan and ann Wharton epstein Viii. Leadership and Community in Late Antique Gaul, by raymond Van Dam iX. Homer the Theologian: Neoplatonist Allegorical Reading and the Growth of the Epic Tradition, by robert lamberton X. Procopius and the Sixth Century, by averil Cameron Xi. Guardians of Language: The Grammarian and Society in Late Antiquity, by robert a. Kaster Xii. Civic Coins and Civic Politics in the Roman East, a.d. 180–275, by Kenneth harl Xiii. Holy Women of the Syrian Orient, introduced and translated by sebastian P. Brock and susan ashbrook harvey XiV. Gregory the Great: Perfection in Imperfection, by Carole straw XV. “Apex Omnium”: Religion in the “Res gestae” of Ammianus, by r. l. rike XVi. Dioscorus of Aphrodito: His Work and His World, by leslie s. B. macCoull XVii. On Roman Time: The Codex-Calendar of 354 and the Rhythms of Urban Life in Late Antiquity, by michele renee salzman XViii. Asceticism and Society in Crisis: John of Ephesus and “The Lives of the Eastern Saints,” by susan ashbrook harvey XiX. Barbarians and Politics at the Court of Arcadius, by alan Cameron and Jacqueline long, with a contribution by lee sherry XX. Basil of Caesarea, by Philip rousseau XXi. In Praise of Later Roman Emperors: The Panegyrici Latini, introduction, translation, and historical commentary by C. e. V. nixon and Barbara saylor rodgers XXii. Ambrose of Milan: Church and Court in a Christian Capital, by neil B. mclynn XXiii. Public Disputation, Power, and Social Order in Late Antiquity, by richard lim XXiV. The Making of a Heretic: Gender, Authority, and the Priscillianist Controversy, by Virginia Burrus XXV. Symeon the Holy Fool: Leontius’s “Life” and the Late Antique City, by Derek Krueger

XXVi. The Shadows of Poetry: Vergil in the Mind of Augustine, by sabine macCormack XXVii. Paulinus of Nola: Life, Letters, and Poems, by Dennis e. Trout XXViii. The Barbarian Plain: Saint Sergius between Rome and Iran, by elizabeth Key fowden XXiX. The Private Orations of Themistius, translated, annotated, and introduced by robert J. Penella XXX. The Memory of the Eyes: Pilgrims to Living Saints in Christian Late Antiquity, by georgia frank XXXi. Greek Biography and Panegyric in Late Antiquity, edited by Tomas hägg and Philip rousseau XXXii. Subtle Bodies: Representing Angels in Byzantium, by glenn Peers XXXiii. Wandering, Begging Monks: Spiritual Authority and the Promotion of Monasticism in Late Antiquity, by Daniel Caner XXXiV. Failure of Empire: Valens and the Roman State in the Fourth Century a.d., by noel lenski XXXV. Merovingian Mortuary Archaeology and the Making of the Early Middle Ages, by Bonnie effros XXXVi. Qus. ayr ‘Amra: Art and the Umayyad Elite in Late Antique Syria, by garth fowden XXXVii. Holy Bishops in Late Antiquity: The Nature of Christian Leadership in an Age of Transition, by Claudia rapp XXXViii. Encountering the Sacred: The Debate on Christian Pilgrimage in Late Antiquity, by Brouria Bitton-ashkelony XXXiX. There Is No Crime for Those Who Have Christ: Religious Violence in the Christian Roman Empire, by michael gaddis Xl. The Legend of Mar Qardagh: Narrative and Christian Heroism in Late Antique Iraq, by Joel Thomas Walker Xli. City and School in Late Antique Athens and Alexandria, by edward J. Watts Xlii. Scenting Salvation: Ancient Christianity and the Olfactory Imagination, by susan ashbrook harvey Xliii. Man and the Word: The Orations of Himerius, edited by robert J. Penella XliV. The Matter of the Gods, by Clifford ando XlV. The Two Eyes of the Earth: Art and Ritual of Kingship between Rome and Sasanian Iran, by matthew P. Canepa XlVi. Riot in Alexandria: Tradition and Group Dynamics in Late Antique Pagan and Christian Communities, by edward J. Watts XlVii. Peasant and Empire in Christian North Africa, by leslie Dossey XlViii. Theodoret’s People: Social Networks and Religious Conflict in Late Roman Syria, by adam m. schor XliX. Sons of Hellenism, Fathers of the Church: Emperor Julian, Gregory of Nazianzus, and the Vision of Rome, by susanna elm

l. Shenoute of Atripe and the Uses of Poverty: Rural Patronage, Religious Conflict, and Monasticism in Late Antique Egypt, by ariel g. lópez li. Doctrine and Power: Theological Controversy and Christian Leadership in the Later Roman Empire, by Carlos r. galvão-sobrinho lii. Crisis of Empire: Doctrine and Dissent at the End of Late Antiquity, by Phil Booth liii. The Final Pagan Generation, by edward J. Watts liV. The Mirage of the Saracen: Christians and Nomads in the Sinai Peninsula in Late Antiquity, by Walter D. Ward lV. Missionary Stories and the Formation of the Syriac Churches, by Jeanne-nicole mellon saint-laurent lVi. A State of Mixture: Christians, Zoroastrians, and Iranian Political Culture in Late Antiquity, by richard e. Payne lVii. Constantine and the Captive Christians of Persia: Martyrdom and Religious Identity in Late Antiquity, by Kyle smith lViii. In the Image of Origen: Eros, Virtue, and Constraint in the Early Christian Academy, by David satran lViX. Being Christian in Vandal Africa: The Politics of Orthodoxy in the Post-Imperial West, by robin Whelan lX. The Wandering Holy Man: The Life of Barsauma, Christian Asceticism, and Religious Conflict in Late Antique Palestine, edited by Johannes hahn and Volker menze lXi. The Life of the Syrian Saint Barsauma: Eulogy of a Hero of the Resistance to the Council of Chalcedon, translated by andrew n. Palmer

The Wandering holy man

The Wandering holy man The life of Barsauma, Christian Asceticism, and Religious Conflict in Late Antique Palestine

edited by Johannes hahn and Volker menze

UniVersiT Y of California Press

University of California Press oakland, California © 2020 by The regents of the University of California

library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data names: hahn, Johannes, editor. | menze, Volker-lorenz, editor. Title: The wandering holy man : the life of Barsauma, Christian asceticism, and religious conflict in late antique Palestine / edited by Johannes hahn and Volker menze. Description: oakland, California : University of California Press, [2020] | includes bibliographical references and index. identifiers: lccn 2019045921 (print) | lccn 2019045922 (ebook) | isbn 9780520304147 (cloth) | isbn 9780520972957 (ebook) subjects: lcsh: Bars. āwmā, saint, –456. | syriac Christian saints— Biography. | Christianity and antisemitism—history. Classification: lcc bx179.b385 w36 2020 (print) | lcc bx179.b385 (ebook) | ddc 270.2092 [b]—dc23 lC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019045921 lC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019045922

manufactured in the United states of america 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 20 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

c ontents

List of Illlustrations Acknowledgments introduction

vii ix 1

Volker Menze

1. Barsauma and the emperors

25

Simon Corcoran

2. ascetic history and rhetoric in the Life of Barsauma

50

Cornelia B. Horn

3. Barsauma’s Travels to the holy land and Jewish history

73

Günter Stemberger

4. Barsauma, eudocia, Jerusalem, and the Temple mount

89

Jan Willem Drijvers

5. Cleansing the sacred space: The holy land and its inhabitants in the Pilgrimage narrative of Barsauma

104

Reuven Kiperwasser and Serge Ruzer

6. “it is not lawful for samaritans to have dealings with Christians!” samaritans in the Life of Barsauma Johannes Hahn

121

7. Wandering monks remembered: hagiography in the Lives of alexander the sleepless and Barsauma the mourner

149

Daniel F. Caner

Conclusion: Barsauma between hagiography and history

171

Johannes Hahn

Appendix: The Life of Barsauma

187

andrew Palmer

Bibliography List of Contributors Index

273 301 303

illustrations

maPs

0.1. 3.1. 6.1. 6.2. 6.3.

Barsauma’s near east Barsauma’s Palestine and travel samaria at the time of Jesus sebaste: City plan with main archaeological sites aqueduct from shechem to samaria-sebaste

x 75 126 128 129

f ig U r e s

1.1. garnet intaglio seal ring with the retrograde legend, mid-5th century c.e. 29 1.2. Tiepolo’s Joseph Receiving Pharaoh’s Ring, ca. 1733–1735 31 6.1. mount gerizim with sanctuary of Jupiter, Tetradrachm, 244–249 c.e., neapolis, samaria 136

vii

acknowled gments

This volume would not have been possible without a grant from the german research foundation (Dfg). in 2009 we applied with a project titled “The syriac Vita Barsauma: edition, Translation, and analysis,” and the Dfg generously funded a position for andrew Palmer for three years at the Westfälische WilhelmsUniversität münster (2010–13). We are grateful that andrew Palmer provided us with a preliminary text and translation of the Vita Barsauma in 2013 so that we were able to organize the conference “The Vita Barsauma and Christian asceticism and religious Conflict in the later roman empire” in september 2013. all participants had a chance to read the text and translation in advance in order to prepare their contributions based on the full Vita available to scholars for the very first time. The essays in this volume were originally presented at the conference in münster and have been revised since then. in the process of publishing the book we lost one contribution (hagith sivan) and gained another (simon Corcoran). We are delighted to see the volume published in the Transformation of the Classical heritage series, and we have been blessed with the professional handling of the volume at the University of California Press. We are particularly grateful to eric schmidt, who showed a lot of understanding for our requests and ideas, and marian rogers for her thorough copyediting. Dan Knox (Universität Wien) and Theo rich (exzellenzcluster “religion und Politik,” Universität münster) kindly read several contributions and checked the english. Katharina Voss (Universität münster) supported us by drawing the maps and checking the manuscript. Johannes Hahn (Münster) & Volker Menze (Budapest/Vienna) ix

Samosata Edessa Carrhae Qalaat Seman Antioch Callinicum

SYRIA

Laodicea Apamea Cyprus

Baalbek

(Heliopolis)

PHOENICIA

Damascus

PALESTINE

Caesarea Sebaste

Gerasa Rabbat Ammon

Jerusalem

Madaba

Gaza Areopolis (Rabbat Moab) Oboda Petra

Negev

ARABIA

Sinai

Red Sea

map 0.1. Barsauma’s near east

Aila

SYRIA Province Negev Desert N 200 km

City Mountain

introduction Volker menze Barsauma destroyed all Syria. He incited thousands of monks against us. . . . Drive out the murderer Barsauma. The murderer to the stadium! Anathema to Barsauma! Barsauma into exile! 1

The basis for these accusations brought forth by the bishops assembled at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 remains dubious, but they were nevertheless serious and far-reaching: the archimandrite Barsauma (Barsaumas/Barsumas/Barsawmo, etc.)2 was believed to have led riotous monks against their bishops as well as having been involved in the assassination of Bishop flavian of Constantinople (446– 449). flavian had been deposed two years earlier at the second Council of ephesus and died shortly afterward under unclear circumstances.3 independent of the question of whether these accusations bear any truth, this very unflattering description of Barsauma in the acts of the council has at least partially shaped the negative image of Barsauma in Western church history. however, for a little more than 100 years now Barsauma has also been known from another text: just before the first World War françois nau edited and translated some syriac fragments of Barsauma’s Life, which show the wandering saint as a violent ascetic and anti-Jewish zealot.4 since their publication, these fragments of Barsauma’s hagiography have been used widely in scholarship, although they present less than a third of the full Life. The full Life of Barsauma offers one of the longest and most extensive hagiographies from antiquity—longer than, for example, the three surviving lives of simeon stylites altogether! 1. ACO ii.1.2, 116 (tr. Price and gaddis, 2:156, modified). 2. Various transliterations of the name (from the greek and syriac texts) have been used; we decided to use the commonly known Barsauma. 3. henry Chadwick, “The exile and Death of flavian of Constantinople: a Prologue to the Council of Chalcedon,” Journal of Theological Studies 6 (1955): 17–34. 4. see below in the section “scholarship on Barsauma.”

1

2

Introduction

as the present volume offers the first full translation of the Life in any modern language, the introduction intends to familiarize the reader with the Life, provide an overview of its recurring themes, and contextualize it within late antique syriac hagiography. furthermore, considering Barsauma’s extremely controversial afterlife as a heretic and murderer in the Chalcedonian tradition, and as a saint in the non-Chalcedonian tradition, it seems crucial to attempt to reconstruct the historical Barsauma as much as this is possible from the extremely biased accounts. finally, as the volume is also intended as a (first) companion to Barsauma, the introduction offers a short history of modern scholarship on the subject. T h e L I F E OF BA R S AUM A : oV e rV i eW a n D s T rU C T U r e

The Life of Barsauma is extraordinary not only because of its length but also because of its unusual structure. The Life is built around ninety-nine “signs” performed by Barsauma and his disciples, including (healing) miracles, exorcisms, and curses.5 This configuration is notable as it stands in contrast to the structure of sixth-century non-Chalcedonian saints’ Lives, which celebrate those who opposed the Council of Chalcedon, but do not contain any miracle stories. The focus of these Lives is not on the supernatural power of the saints but on their doctrinal positions.6 Barsauma’s battle against the Council of Chalcedon and the “heretics” ruling the roman empire, by contrast, is confined to the last third of the Life. sixty percent of the Life presents an itinerant ascetic whose blessings and curses made as much of an impact on the poor as on the roman elite, and who directed his violent zealotry against Jews, pagans, and samaritans. Before analyzing some of the recurring motifs, a short overview of the structure of the Life is necessary. in §§ 1–31 the author introduces the saint. The first five paragraphs cover his childhood, his first vision, a prophecy by others concerning his future, his first discipleship, and—indeed—his first pilgrimage (out of a supposed total of four) to Jerusalem.7 The next twenty paragraphs (§§ 5–25) detail Barsauma’s asceticism and hardships (for example, his diet in § 19), and how his growing fame attracted disciples and compelled him to found a cave monastery.8 The author then presents Barsauma’s first exorcisms and miracles (§§ 26–31), even claiming that Barsauma 5. note that in the following the Life is quoted according to Palmer’s 166 paragraphs, not according to the “signs.” 6. for the historical Barsauma and the Christological debate, see below. elijah’s Life of John of Tella, for example, contains no miracle; in Brooks, Vitae virorum apud monophysitas celeberrimorum, 31–95 (23–60). 7. §§ 1–4, as there are §§ 3a and 3B. 8. The author seems to have no concrete details of the foundation of the monastery, which is believed—according to later tradition—to be southeast of melitene.

Introduction

3

was able to stop the course of the sun (§ 29). These miracles, as well as Barsauma’s often fatal curses, become a defining feature of the entire Life. after this “introduction,” which establishes Barsauma as a local protagonist for whom others predicted an important future, the saint, accompanied by some of his disciples, starts his travels, though always returning to his home monastery. Barsauma’s first extensive journey to mount sinai, including another pilgrimage to Jerusalem, was framed by the famous simeon stylites: when Barsauma started his journey, simeon declared him the most righteous man of his generation (§§ 32/33), and on his return north, Barsauma visited simeon (§§ 46/47).9 The next section of the Life sees Barsauma at home in his monastery, offering exorcisms as well as miracles and curses (§§ 48–59: miracles concerning snakes, diseases, infertile land, etc.). Barsauma then travels again to different regions, performing exorcisms, fertility miracles, miracles against pestilence, curses, and so on (§§ 60–73). after a short stay at home (§§ 74/75, which is short relative to the entire narrative of the Life; we are unable, however, to establish a chronology from the Life), he embarked on another pilgrimage to Jerusalem (§§ 76–83). This time he met empress eudocia (who had come to Jerusalem in 438/9 and had permanently lived there since 441/2) and instructed her on almsgiving (§ 83). his return home (§§ 84–86) was paved with miracles, but his stay at home lasted for only a few miracles (§§ 87/88) before he made the (in)famous journey to Jerusalem (§§ 89/90) that has caught the attention of scholars since nau.10 according to the hagiographer, 103,000 Jews who had been allowed by the empress eudocia to convene in the city for the feast of Tabernacles attempted to take over Jerusalem assisted by imperial officials, clergy, and even the empress. only Barsauma and his disciples resisted, and with the help of god—who killed many of the Jews—they ensured that Jerusalem would remain a Christian city (§§ 91–96).11 This is not only the longest story, covering almost one-tenth of the Life, but also the most dramatic episode in the entire Life of Barsauma. The rest of the Life is overshadowed by the doctrinal controversy (§§ 98–166). Barsauma returned home (§ 97) from Jerusalem and performed signs and miracles (§§ 99–102). heretics and apostates are mentioned for the first time in § 99, and Barsauma’s involvement in ecclesiastical politics begins after § 103, when his

9. simeon was a “rock star” among late antique saints whose fame probably grew even after his death, and his church, Qal’at sim’an, became one of the most famous and most visited pilgrimage sites in the eastern mediterranean. simeon has another vision of Barsauma and meets with him (§§ 46–47). another saint included in the Life—although less clearly identifiable—is James of Cyrrhestica (§ 90). 10. on the way he may have met with James of Cyrrhestica (§ 90), as noted above. 11. Volker menze, “The Dark side of holiness: Barsauma the ‘roasted’ and the invention of a Jewish Jerusalem,” in Motions of Late Antiquity. Essays on Religion, Politics, and Society in Honour of Peter Brown, ed. Jamie Kreiner and helmut reimitz (Turnhout: Brepols, 2016,) 231–48; see also below.

4

Introduction

former fellow student and now bishop of samosata, Zachariah, was killed by ecclesiastical opponents. Barsauma traveled to Constantinople (§ 103.3) to visit emperor Theodosius ii (408–450), who wanted to make him patriarch of antioch (§ 105). Barsauma declined, but Theodosius nevertheless requested that he manage the affairs of the church as well as the poor. as will be discussed below in “The historical Barsauma,” Barsauma was then charged with presiding over the second Council of ephesus in 449 (§ 106). after these events, Barsauma traveled to the east and was supposed to convene another council in antioch (§ 108). The historical Barsauma reached the peak of his influence in 449 only to be regarded as a heretic two years later, and the hagiographer translates this turn of events as the result of satan being jealous of Barsauma’s victories and conspiring against him through clerics and other influential men of the empire (starting in § 109). Theodosius’s death is recorded (§ 113), as is the initiative of the emperor’s successor, marcian, to convene the Council of Chalcedon (§ 116) that considered Barsauma to be a heretic, and marcian’s oppression of resistance against the council (§ 119). Until the end of his life (§ 157), the Chalcedonians ( = “heretics” in the Life) harass Barsauma, accuse him of sorcery (§ 115), slander him (§ 120), and try to kill him (§§ 143–152). The hagiographer assures readers that Barsauma longed for martyrdom, but none of the plots succeeded. Yet Barsauma was not a saint who endured injustice quietly—he cursed empress Pulcheria (§ 128) as well as emperor marcian (§ 153), both of whom died shortly afterward. and he showed his strength even in his old age: he continued to travel to Persia (§ 110.15) and once more to Constantinople (§ 112), and finally returned home (after § 129 he seems to have stayed at his home monastery until his death in § 157). as a proper saint, Barsauma provided the faithful with cures and miracles after his death (§§ 162/63). The Life ends with two colophons regarding the possible author, samuel (§§ 164/65).12 r e C U r r i n g m o T i f s a n D hag io g r a P h iC C o n T e X T

many motifs in the Life of Barsauma are common to late antique hagiography: cases similar to Barsauma’s severe asceticism can be found in many hagiographic narratives of the time, the prime example being simeon stylites, and Theodoret’s History of the Monks of Syria, which is full of holy men who practice severe mortification of their bodies. like many protagonists of such hagiographic narratives, Barsauma is explicitly compared to old Testament protagonists—for example, to moses (§ 14.4), elisha (§§ 18.3 and 49.4) and elijah (§ 158.5). also a wandering ascetic is not uncommon in the fifth century: alexander the sleepless and Peter

12. for author and date, see below.

Introduction

5

the iberian are well-documented examples, but, as the canons of Chalcedon from 451 show, wandering ascetics were considered problems for ecclesiastical supervision by the bishops.13 The degree of itinerancy may have varied widely, and in Barsauma’s case, it remains difficult to judge how much of his life he was a wandering ascetic, as the Life offers no date for either his journeys or his stays at his home monastery. The focus on his extensive travels, however, indicates that for the description of his holy deeds, the aspect of itinerancy mattered greatly, even though he always returned to his monastery at some point. anti-heretical, anti-Jewish, and anti-pagan sentiments are not unique to the Life of Barsauma; they can be found in other syriac hagiography of the time as well. sebastian Brock remarked recently concerning the (anti-)heretical elements in syriac hagiography that in “prose Lives of the fifth to the seventh century, when theological controversy was at its height, an element of propaganda was rarely absent.”14 The sixth-century Life of John of Tella by a certain elias, for example, focuses exclusively on John’s opposition to the (according to the hagiographer, heretical) Chalcedonians.15 The earlier Life of Rabbula includes some anti-heretical as well as antipagan elements.16 Jews are mentioned here as well but do not play a major role as opponents of rabbula. Jews (and samaritans) also appear in both the famous syriac Life of Simeon Stylites and the Life of Peter the Iberian. simeon stylites supposedly wrote a letter to emperor Theodosius ii opposing the protection of synagogues (syriac v. Sim. 121–23), but other than the general theme that a Christian emperor should not be the friend of Jewish communities, Jews are absent from the Life of Simeon. in the Life of Peter the Iberian Jews appear as potential converts, and in the Life of Rabbula the Jewish population in edessa laments the death of the saint, although they do not share his faith.17 anti-Judaism is clearly not at the forefront of any of these Lives. These Lives stand in stark contrast to the Life of Barsauma: anti-Jewish rhetoric and violent acts against Jews and synagogues, along with anti-pagan and anti-samaritan sentiments, characterize the first two-thirds of the Life (until § 104, 13. see especially Canon 4, which no longer allowed monks to wander around without explicit permission from their bishops. 14. sebastian P. Brock, “syriac hagiography,” in The Ashgate Research Companion to Byzantine Hagiography, vol. 1, Periods and Places, ed. stephanos efthymiadis (london: ashgate, 2011), 260. 15. see n. 6 above. 16. see now Phenix and horn, The Rabbula Corpus. 17. of course, Judaism equals falsehood (see glen W. Bowersock, “The syriac life of rabbula and syrian hellenism,” in Greek Biography and Panegyrics in Late Antiquity, ed. Tomas hägg and Philip rousseau [Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000], 264) but this idea is not prominent in these hagiographies; for the Jewish girl who converts in the Life of Peter the Iberian: Cornelia B. horn, “antiJewish Polemic and Conversion of Jews to anti-Chalcedonian asceticism in the holy land: The Case of eugenia of Tyre,” Aram, 18–19 (2006–2007): 33–48. Jews mourn the death of rabbula, and samaritans accompany the burial procession of Peter the iberian, according to their Lives.

6

Introduction

when the Life becomes anti-heretical). Barsauma is depicted as a saint on a mission to Christianize Palestine and the “holy places,” actively engaging in battles against opponents, especially the numerous and powerful Jews, but also pagans and samaritans as well as imperial officials. Volker menze recently argued that the hagiographer deliberately invented the image of a Jewish Jerusalem that his hero was then able to conquer and take over in order to make the city permanently Christian.18 Barsauma’s supposed four pilgrimages to Jerusalem in the first half of the Life emphasize the saint’s ties to the holy places.19 The second half of the hagiography (roughly 40 percent of the Life) is dedicated to Barsauma’s fight against Dyophysite clerics, the Council of Chalcedon, and the nonecclesiastical, imperial supporters of this council. at the beginning of this part, Barsauma is presented as reaching the peak of his influence when emperor Theodosius ii (408–450) supposedly asked him to preside over the second Council of ephesus in 449, regarded as the third ecumenical council at the time. however, after emperor marcian came to power in 450 and convoked the Council of Chalcedon in 451 (which nullified the decisions of ephesus ii), Barsauma’s influence fell rapidly. although the Life does not depict him as having been condemned, he was on the defensive: the Chalcedonians, presented as powerful and influential persons, close in on the saint, including (unsuccessful) assassination attempts on his life. Barsauma’s most prominent opponents were of course the emperor marcian and his wife, Pulcheria. overall, the author creates throughout the Life the image of a saint who was surrounded by powerful opponents from all religious corners, while Barsauma and his disciples are depicted as the only Christians who retained orthodoxy. however, what strikes the (modern) reader most is the intensity of Barsauma’s enmities, and the saint’s merciless attitude. The hagiographer does not just depict a saint whose beliefs and virtues were opposed to those of heretics, Jews, pagans, and samaritans but a hero who sought to subdue his enemies completely or kill them. When Barsauma reached the pagan city reqem d-gaya, he did not just persuade the non-Christian inhabitants of the superiority of the Christian god by predicting and producing much-needed rain, but he let the rain continue for days until the masses of water threatened to drown the city (§ 35). only when even the most stubborn opponent gave up resistance, the priests of the city had destroyed their pagan idols, and the demons had left the city—only after such a total victory, did Barsauma stop the rain (§ 36). 18. menze, “The Dark side of holiness.” 19. other saints also went to Jerusalem as part of their faith but usually just once. for rabbula, see overbeck, S. Ephraemi Syri opera selecta, 164–65 (tr. Doran, 69–70). Daniel the stylite originally wanted to go there as well but was advised to go to the second Jerusalem, Constantinople: Life of Daniel the Stylite 10 (ed. Delehaye, 11–12, tr. Dawes and Baynes, Three Byzantine Saints, 12–13).

Introduction

7

many other episodes underline the uncompromising character of Barsauma: the most prominent is certainly Barsauma’s famous “reconquest” of Jerusalem, in the course of which god killed many of the Jews (§§ 91–96). The violence, however, was not confined to Jews or heretics; it was also directed against coreligionists (if they did not lead a god-fearing life) and against the saint himself: Barsauma not only deprived himself of nourishment but seriously punished and hurt his body by wearing “an iron tunic next to his skin. he used to keep his face and his chest turned toward the sun as it traveled across the sky, so that his body became roasted by its rays, resembling a fish that is fried in a pan. it was scorched by the heat of the iron, like the skin of a lamb when it blisters in a fiery oven” (§ 17.1). most disturbing—and hardly in line with official ecclesiastical policy—are the episodes in the Life that openly depict spitefulness toward Barsauma’s opponents: “now the [non-Chalcedonian] priest of that village took pleasure in his [the Chalcedonian priest’s] distress, because he had been persecuted for his faith. he and his congregation all gave thanks to god, because they were on Barsauma’s side” (§ 141.6). The Chalcedonian priest begged for mercy and asked them to send for Barsauma, but to no avail: “after suffering great torments, that priest gave up the ghost” (§ 141.9). other stories, in which god employed demons in order to torment women who made fun of Barsauma, almost sound blasphemous (§ 58). Using the eucharist to clean the source of water of an evil spirit (§ 49) was also not in line with official church doctrine at the time.20 overall, the Life is unique: while it retains some chronological order—from Barsauma’s youth and beginnings as an ascetic through the peak of his influence as a non-Chalcedonian archimandrite right up to his death—it is grouped around miracles and curses. Barsauma is a most powerful saint, used to negotiating with emperors and deciding about ecclesiastical politics; an accomplished ascetic and mourner; and at the same time a gloating and sadistic hero who annihilates all religious life that does not meet his own standards. The Life certainly belongs to syriac hagiography, as it was written originally in syriac, but it is also connected to Palestinian hagiography because so much of its narrative concerns the “holy land” through the reports of Barsauma’s “pilgrimages.” aU T ho r a n D DaT e

The Life ends with two colophons offering information about the supposed author. The first is written anonymously in the first person: the author apologizes

20. see Volker menze, “The Power of the eucharist in early medieval syria: grant for salvation or magical medication?,” in Prayer and Worship in Eastern Christianities, 5th to 11th Centuries, ed. Brouria Bitton-ashkelony and Derek Krueger (london and new York: routledge, 2017), 116–31.

8

Introduction

for the length of the Life but at the same time warns the reader that he actually “left many signs unwritten” (§ 164). The second colophon speaks with a different voice: now it was the priest samuel who wrote down these acts (consisting) of the achievements of the champion Barsauma. he was one of Barsauma’s first disciples. But all of us know that all these things have been written down in truth. This same priest samuel also wrote many metrical homilies and teaching-songs and sermons on the faith and on various subjects; and refutations of all superstitions; and a refutation of the Dyophysites; and fine commentaries on the scriptures. as for us, slaves of Christ, who have concluded this book, we conjure you by the almighty god, let no one dare to change even one of its excellent words! (§ 165.1–3)

here, we are led to believe that a group of Barsauma’s disciples confirmed the author’s account and identified him as a priest called samuel, who was also the author of a number of other treatises. however, this samuel is otherwise completely unknown.21 if true, the Life would have been written shortly after Barsauma’s death in 456,22 but the date of the Life has been debated in scholarship. in his multivolume work, History of Asceticism in the Syrian Orient, arthur Vööbus dismissed the authenticity of the note on samuel because in the first colophon the author remained anonymous and only noted, “The lord knows my name.”23 however, while the second colophon is certainly added by a different scribe, who ascribed the Life to samuel, this alone hardly speaks against the authenticity of samuel as author. Vööbus noted summarily the possibility that the author of the Life may have known a syriac translation of malalas’s Chronicle as well as that he must have been aware of the Julianist controversy, which started after 518, between the non-Chalcedonian bishops Julian of halicarnassos and severus of antioch.24 Therefore Vööbus dated the Life to after 550, a dating that lucas van rompay recently took for granted.25

21. ignatius a. i. Barsoum, The Scattered Pearls: A History of Syriac Literature and Sciences (Piscataway, nJ: gorgias Press, 2003), 244–45. 22. for the date, see below in the section “The historical Barsauma.” 23. arthur Vööbus, History of Asceticism in the Syrian Orient: A Contribution to the History of Culture in the Near East, CsCo 197 (louvain: secrétariat du CorpussCo, 1960), 2:197. 24. for a report on the early stages of the clash, see sebastian P. Brock, “a report from a supporter of severos on Trouble in alexandria,” in SYNAXIS KATHOLIKE: Beiträge zu Gottesdienst und Geschichte der fünf altkirchlichen Patriarchate für Heinzgerd Brakmann zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. Diliana atanassova and Tinatin Chronz (Vienna: lit, 2014), 47–64. 25. lucas van rompay, “Barsawmo,” in Gorgias Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Syriac Heritage, ed. sebastian P. Brock et al. (Piscataway, nJ: gorgias Press, 2011), 59.

Introduction

9

Concerning the question of malalas as source, Vööbus seems to have taken over this point from ernest honigmann (without acknowledgment), who—like Vööbus—did not detail this argument any further.26 however, as andrew Palmer pointed out recently, it probably refers to the allusion to the “count of the Black sea straits” in the Life (§ 122.1).27 The first literary note of this office comes from Procopius for the time of emperor Justinian, but an inscription published in the 1980s indicates that it existed already in the fifth century.28 The Julianist controversy concerning the incorruptibility of Christ’s body cannot be detailed here, but the story in the Life of Barsauma of a possessed woman questioning the human body of Christ simply shows that understanding the nature of Christ’s body was an issue long before Julian of halicarnassos (§ 137)—and was certainly already discussed around 450.29 Therefore, Palmer suggested most recently that the text could be “as early as 456.”30 in contrast to earlier scholars, Palmer also had the full text at his disposal and rightly noted that the author of the Life mentioned twice that he wanted to come to an end of the story: in § 102.1 he wrote, “i now come, therefore, to the end of his contest, the last part of the tale of his victorious deeds,” and in § 114.2 he confessed, “i must press on toward the conclusion of Barsauma’s story.” as the version we have now contains 166 paragraphs according to Palmer’s counting, it may well be that another (maybe sixth-century) author took over later or at least added some of the stories. Johannes hahn persuasively argues in this volume that the episodes concerning the samaritans (§§ 80 and 84) could not have been written after the samaritan uprisings (starting 484);31 therefore, at least the first part up to § 102 must have been written in the decades after Barsauma’s death. as there is no

26. ernest honigmann, Le couvent de Barsauma et le patriarcat jacobite d’Antioche et de Syrie, CsCo 146, subsidia 7 (louvain: imprimerie orientaliste l. Durbecq, 1954), 15; see p. 16, where he dated the Life to 550–650 without providing details. 27. andrew Palmer, “The West-syrian monastic founder Bars. awmo: a historical review of the scholarly literature,” in Orientalia Christiana: Festschrift für Hubert Kaufhold zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. Peter Bruns and heinz otto luthe (Wiesbaden: harrassowitz, 2013), 408 n. 39. 28. The inscription may be dated to around 470; see fiona haarer, Anastasius I; Politics and Empire in the Late Roman World (Cambridge: francis Cairns, 2006), 216–20 with references. 29. Thus already Palmer, “The West-syrian monastic founder Barsawmo,” 408. surprisingly no scholar has pointed to the acts of the second Council of ephesus in 449, which record a libellus discussing this issue: flemming, Akten der Ephesinischen Synode, 128–31. for the Julianist controversy, see now Yonatan moss, Incorruptible Bodies: Christology, Society, and Authority in Late Antiquity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2016). 30. andrew Palmer, “a Tale of Two synods. The archimandrite Barsumas at ephesus in 449 and at Chalcedon in 451,” Journal of Eastern Christian Studies 66 (2014): 39; Palmer, “The West-syrian monastic founder Barsawmo,” 408. 31. see below, p. 00.

10

Introduction

strict chronological framework, it would have been easy for any writer copyist to embellish the Life with further miracle stories. if the author intended to close the narrative shortly after § 102, the Chalcedonian controversy would have been a later addition.32 however, two observations not yet discussed in scholarship are worth mentioning. in the later part of the Life, one of those Chalcedonians who threatened to kill Barsauma was supposedly the bishop of Cyrrhus (§ 151). although there is no name in the Life, this can refer only to Theodoret of Cyrrhus, the great Dyophysite theologian and staunch opponent of the patriarchs of alexandria Cyril and Dioscorus. it seems rather unlikely that Theodoret would have cooked up such a plot, but it might indicate that the Life was written rather early, when the hatred against one of the major winners of the Council of Chalcedon was still fresh.33 The Life notes the death of this bishop (in other words, before Barsauma’s death in 456), and, as scholars have set Theodoret’s death between 453 and 466, it would support an early date for Theodoret’s demise, perhaps 455—if it bears any historical value.34 notable also is that the Life mentions (older) contemporary saints like Jacob of Cyrrhestica and simeon stylites, but Peter the iberian remains absent. if the Life of Peter had already been composed, and his fame had spread, it is likely that the author of the Life of Barsauma would have mentioned him as well. as John rufus wrote the Life of Peter the Iberian after 491, it also contributes to the conclusion that the Life of Barsauma—or a first draft—was a fifth-century composition.35 a firm dating for the Life remains difficult, but the composition of such a forceful and angry polemic against everything that is not non-Chalcedonian, fits best in the decades following the Council of Chalcedon in 451.36

32. if the author originally ended the narrative soon after § 114, it is difficult to see a good cutoff point, as the Chalcedonian controversy just started here with the rule of emperor marcian. 33. however, both parties, Chalcedonians as well as non-Chalcedonians, kept their grudges alive for centuries, and the non-Chalcedonian belief of Theodoret’s wickedness is welldocumented. Ps.Zacharias rhetor in his Chronicle iii.1 (greatrex et al., 103) credits Theodoret with having been asked to preside over the Council of Chalcedon. 34. for the various options for dating Theodoret’s death, see istván Pásztori-Kupán, Theodoret of Cyrrhus (london: routledge, 2006), 26. 35. although Peter’s fame may have spread only in syriac-speaking areas after his Life had been translated into syriac; see John rufus, Life of Peter the Iberian (horn and Phenix), lxxiii-lxxxv. The character of Barsauma as depicted in his Life speaks against a reception of Barsauma in the Life of Peter the Iberian. 36. Considering the author’s knowledge of the height of simeon stylites’s column (§ 32.3) as discussed below: Theodoret’s account of simeon was already available when Barsauma died, and maybe the increasing heights of simeon’s columns were general knowledge in monastic circles in the near east.

Introduction

11

T h e h i s T o r iC a l Ba r s aUm a : T h e r e C o r D f r om T h e L I F E

With a complete edition of the Life in hand, we are now in a much better position than previous scholars to provide an accurate image of the historical Barsauma. it must be said up-front, however, that Barsauma remains an obscure (although influential) historical figure of his time.37 only a few accounts mention Barsauma at all: the acts of the second Council of ephesus, the acts of the Council of Chalcedon (partially incorporating acts of the second Council of ephesus), and the Life.38 in other words, except for a few but very important pieces of information, we rely exclusively on a hagiography that can hardly be regarded as a credible source. according to the Life, Barsauma may have been born in a village called Beth awton in the district of samosata around 384 and probably died on 1 february 456, in his monastery southeast of melitene.39 after the early death of his father, his mother remarried and moved to another village (§ 3a.1). a certain abraham became his spiritual father, and in the following years Barsauma practiced extreme asceticism, endured many hardships, and undertook several pilgrimages to Jerusalem. shortly after his own episcopal ordination, Bishop gemellius of Perrha (411–435) ordained Barsauma as a deacon (§ 12.3), together with an otherwise unknown Zachariah, who appears later as bishop of samosata (§ 103). gemellius is known

37. he would still be remembered in Chalcedonian heresiologies next to eutyches and Dioscorus centuries later: see Patriarch sophronius of Jerusalem’s Synodical Letter, in Pauline allen, Sophronius of Jerusalem and Seventh-Century Heresy: The “Synodical Letter” and Other Documents (oxford: oxford University Press, 2009), 140–41. 38. There are a few later authors who, however, based their knowledge of Barsauma on the texts mentioned above: in the greek Chalcedonian tradition Theodore anagnostes (see günther Christian hansen, “ein kurzer Bericht über das Konzil von Chalkedon,” Fontes Minores 10 [1998]: 101–39) and in the syrian orthodox tradition especially michael the syrian (for example, Chronicle Viii.6–7 and Viii.10, ed. and tr. J.-B. Chabot, 4:172, 178–80, 183, and 196–97; tr. in 2:14–15 and 25, 28–29, 33, and 52–53) but also Barhebraeus (Ecclesiastical Chronicle, ed. Wilmshurst, 52–53, 58–59, 62–63, 64–67); Palmer, “The West-syrian monastic founder Barsawmo,” discusses michael’s use of the Life; Barsauma is also mentioned in the syriac Life of Daniel (of mount aghlosh): Palmer, “a Tale of Two synods,” 55–56. 39. § 7.2 noted that Barsauma did not sit or lie down for fifty-four years until his death (the fiftyfour years are repeated in § 10.3), and it is assumed that he started this practice when he was eighteen years old (as young ascetic). his death can be more firmly dated to 1 february (§ 157.4), and as he died shortly before emperor marcian (who died January 457)—but with one harvest in between (§ 159.4)— and Proterius of alexandria (who also died in 457), the year of Barsauma’s death seems to be 456; Palmer also regards this as Barsauma’s year of death: Palmer, “The West-syrian monastic founder Barsawmo,” 399 and 403; and Palmer, “a Tale of Two synods,” 50. Vööbus, History of Asceticism in the Syrian Orient, 2:203 thinks either 457 or 458.

12

Introduction

from another source, but the ordination of Barsauma cannot be verified.40 The Life also makes reference to simeon stylites, who supposedly declared Barsauma the most righteous man of his generation (§§ 32/33), and Barsauma later visited him (§ 47). The author of the Life might have known (one of) the Lives of simeon, as he noted the precise heights of simeon’s columns, but the knowledge is not reciprocal: simeon’s three extant Lives do not mention Barsauma.41 according to the Life, Barsauma’s fame grew through a crude mixture of providing miracles and the saint’s zeal in destroying pagan idols and temples, Jewish sabbath houses, and samaritan synagogues. During one of his stays in Jerusalem, it was up to Barsauma to prevent a Jewish coup d’état from taking over the holy city.42 Barsauma also traveled to Constantinople to meet emperor Theodosius ii (§§ 103.3 and 104) because Barsauma’s former colleague Bishop Zachariah of samosata (maybe bishop ca. 446–448) was stoned to death (§ 103.2).43 as he did not accept any gifts, Barsauma rose in the emperor’s “esteem to the status of one of the apostles” (§ 104.4), and the emperor asked Barsauma to become patriarch of antioch (at that point still occupied by Domnus [442–449], who was deposed by Dioscorus of alexandria at the second Council of ephesus in 449) and his disciples to be ordained bishops of other sees (§ 105.1). Barsauma declined, but Theodosius continued to urge him “to take care of the management of the Church and of the poor, even while remaining in the habit of a mourner, and be a director for the bishops in the cities and for the judges in all regions” (§ 105.3). The emperor gave Barsauma his ring in order to invest him with his own power, and wrote to the bishops in 449, when they had convened for the council 40. gemellius was the addressee of a letter by rabbula of edessa; see georg günter Blum, Rabbula von Edessa: Der Christ, der Bischof, der Theologe, CsCo 300, subsidia 34 (louvain: secrétariat du CorpussCo, 1969), 111–12 and 126–28; see also Klaus-Peter Todt and Bernd a. Vest, Syria (Syria Prōtē, Syria Deutera, Syria Euphratēsia), Tabula imperii Byzantini 15 (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen akademie der Wissenschaften, 2015), 2:1575. 41. The height of the columns as mentioned in § 32.2 matches most of the heights as given by Theodoret—with one mismatch (24 instead of 22 cubits), and one additional height that can be found in simeon’s Vita by antonios and the syriac Life; see robert Doran’s introduction in The Lives of Simeon Stylites, 17. matti moosa, The Maronites in History (syracuse: syracuse University Press, 1986), 65–66 refers to an unpublished manuscript of the Life of Simeon that supposedly mentions Barsauma. however, moosa probably refers here to the simeon story in the Life of Barsauma and mixed this up with the Life of Simeon. i am indebted to Dina Boero (Princeton) who discussed this problem with me via e-mail. 42. menze, “The Dark side of holiness,” 237–40. 43. We do not know of Zacharias otherwise, but it is possible that a bishop was killed by a mob as part of the ecclesiastical controversies at the time. in 449 a certain rufinus was bishop of samosata: ACO ii.1.1, 79 (tr. Price and gaddis, 1:145). Todt and Vest, Syria, 2: 1688 date the tenure of Zacharias tentatively between andreas of samosata (428/9–445) and rufinus (449 [or earlier)]–after 451); giorgio fedalto, Hierarchia Ecclesiastica Orientalis, vol. 2 (Padua: edizioni messaggero, 1988) does not know of Zacharias.

Introduction

13

in ephesus, that Barsauma had become the emperor’s “father and director,” and that bishops and judges would be at Barsauma’s command: “let the judgment of the synod of bishops be decided according to the word of that slave of god” (§ 106.3). The Life glances over the Council of ephesus in a few sentences, depicting Barsauma as having presided over it, while Dioscorus and Juvenal of Jerusalem—who of course, according to the surviving acts of the council, were the leading protagonists—played only secondary roles (§ 107). after the council, the Life claims that Barsauma was in charge of convening a synod in antioch and chose a successor for Domnus of antioch, who was deposed in ephesus.44 honigmann argued that the author of the Life intended to present the saint as the first non-Chalcedonian quasi patriarch of antioch: “les propositions que Théodose fait à Barsaumā de résider à antioche et d’y nommer des évêques ‘pur les autres villes’, la présidence du pretend concile d’antioche, tout cela trahit clairement le désir de presenter le saint comme le premier patriarche monophysite d’antioche.”45 The Life continues that Theodosius sent out a letter “to the whole roman empire” in which he supposedly made Barsauma the caretaker of all churches, the commander of all judges, the father of all bishops, and the executive of the emperor (§ 108.3). in sum, Barsauma became the highest authority in the roman empire, and opposing him equaled opposition to god (§ 108.4).

T h e h i s T o r iC a l Ba r s aUm a aT e P h e sU s a n D C ha l C e D o n , 4 4 9 / 5 1

These fantastic episodes make the Life a wonderful piece of late antique hagiography, but none of these stories should be given much historical credibility, with one partial exception—Barsauma indeed gained an unusually elevated position at the Council of ephesus in 449. however, although Barsauma’s participation in that council is not made up, the Life greatly exaggerates his role. according to an imperial letter that survives in the acts of the council, emperor Theodosius (408–450) did invite Barsauma to the second Council of ephesus: it has not escaped our Piety in what sort of contest the most god-fearing and holy archimandrites of the east have been engaged, fighting on behalf of the orthodox faith and turning away from certain bishops among those in the oriental cities sick with the impiety of nestorius, the orthodox peoples being joined with the same most

44. The Life does not mention any condemnations or depositions but simply mentions that Barsauma left for antioch to appoint a new bishop; this seems rather unlikely, but Palmer, “a Tale of Two synods,” 51 considers it a possibility. 45. honigmann, Le couvent de Barsauma, 20; this has to be seen in connection with honigmann dating the Life of Barsauma to a time when the syrian orthodox Church was being established.

14

Introduction god-fearing archimandrites in the contest. Therefore, since Your holiness also has endured this sort of toil on behalf of the orthodox faith and appeared before our Piety, we think it right for Your holiness, renowned for purity of life and orthodox faith, to arrive at the city of ephesians and, acting in the place of all the most godfearing archimandrites in the east, to sit with the holy synod decreed to assemble there and to decree things pleasing to god with the other holy fathers and bishops.46

Theodosius’s invitation to Barsauma is also mentioned in the emperor’s invitation to Dioscorus of alexandria, and in the acts of the Council of ephesus, Barsauma signed as “presbyter and archimandrite,” representing himself, not any absent bishop.47 he gave his verdict as last participant for the restoration of the archimandrite eutyches as well as the condemnation of flavian of Constantinople and eusebius of Dorylaeum, but he signed as 133rd of 140 bishops (or their representatives, but even some bishops signed after Barsauma).48 in other words, Barsauma held a unique position for a nonbishop as a full member at an ecumenical council. however, offering ecclesiastical representation to the ascetic and monastic layer of society might have been regarded as logical at the time. asceticism/ monasticism had developed as the most dynamic element of Christianity since the days of anthony and Pachomius. fifth-century monasticism was not an exclusively rural or contemplative phenomenon; as Peter hatlie rightly pointed out for the city of Constantinople, monks “claimed increasingly more public rights for themselves and spoke with a louder voice than had been imaginable in an earlier generation.”49 When the archimandrite eutyches was condemned in 448, the local council consisted of thirty-two bishops and twenty-three archimandrites. it was in this “politicized climate” that monks played their part in ecclesiastical politics, and

46. ACO ii.1.1, 71 (tr. Price and gaddis, 1:137, but the present translation is taken from simon Corcoran’s contribution, which differs in one important matter concerning Barsauma’s stay in Constantinople; see below). 47. ACO ii.1.1, 71 (tr. Price and gaddis, 1:136). see also the english translation of same text in the syriac acts: samuel g. f. Perry, The Second Council of Ephesus (Dartford: orient Press, 1881), 405. additional material translated from ms add. 12156 in the British library; see also fergus millar, “The syriac acts of the second Council of ephesus (449),” in Chalcedon in Context: Church Councils, 400– 700, ed. richard Price and mary Whitby (liverpool: liverpool University Press, 2009), 45–69. There are signatures of 130 bishops in the first session (greek text), and 112 signatures of bishops in the last session (syriac): ACO ii.1.1, 78–81 (tr. Price and gaddis, 1:145–46); flemming, Akten der ephesinischen Synode, 8–9. 48. maybe the last signatures were collected from absent bishops or their representatives. see the acts of ephesus preserved in the first session of the Council of Chalcedon: i.884 (113): ACO ii.1.1, 186. for the sentence against flavian and eusebius, the greek version is abbreviated; only the latin text preserves the full text: i.1069 and i.1070 (133); ACO ii.3.1, 252 and 258. 49. Peter hatlie, The Monks and Monasteries of Constantinople, ca. 350–850 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 112.

Introduction

15

that episcopal as well as imperial protagonists attempted to use them also for their own ends.50 The Council of Chalcedon in 451 attempted to limit the monks’ influence in ecclesiastical politics, but this must be understood as a reaction against the extremely powerful Cyrillian and alexandrian monastic party (to which Barsauma also belonged) that had supported the council of 449.51 in other words, for contemporaries before 451 a monastic representation at ephesus ii may have been regarded as natural recognition of the importance of monks and monasticism for ecclesiastical politics at the time, while it was only Chalcedon that brought about an abrupt and unexpected break with the historical development up to 450. Be this as it may, bishops nevertheless retained their dominant position within the church, as one participant of subepiscopal rank among more than 100 bishops speaks against any “democratization” in ecclesiastical matters. however, a representative—who was presbyter after all52—with a dedicated following could be a powerful tool at any synod. at the same time, this archimandrite could curb unruly monks, and allow episcopal and imperial leadership to channel monkish demands. at first glance, the obvious choice for such an elevated political position might have been eutyches, an influential archimandrite in Constantinople.53 nestorius, the deposed and condemned bishop of Constantinople (428–431), complained in exile ca. 450 that because emperor Theodosius ii supported eutyches without any reservation, the archimandrite could behave like a “bishop of bishops,” and Theophanes Confessor reports centuries later that Chrysaphius, omnipotent eunuch at Theodosius’s court, wished to install eutyches as bishop of Constantinople

50. for the empress Pulcheria, see, for example, John a. mcguckin, “nestorius and the Political factions of fifth-Century Byzantium: factors in his Personal Downfall,” Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 78.3 (1996): 14–18. 51. for the legal aspects of Chalcedon for monks and monasticism, see leo Ueding, “Die Kanones von Chalkedon in ihrer Bedeutung für mönchtum und Klerus,” in Das Konzil von Chalkedon: Geschichte und Gegenwart, ed. alois grillmeier and heinrich Bacht (Würzburg: echter, 1953), 2: 569–676. 52. The Life may actually be correct in stating that Barsauma was considered worthy to be ordained bishop, but promotion probably had no appeal for Barsauma, as he would lose the monkish foundation of his support. 53. eutyches has been studied since eduard schwartz, Der Prozess des Eutyches (munich: Bayerische akademie der Wissenschaften, 1929). see also georg may, “Das lehrverfahren gegen eutyches im november des Jahres 448: Zur Vorgeschichte des Konzils von Chalkedon,” Annuarium Historiae Conciliorum 21 (1989): 1–61. george a. Bevan and Patrick T. r. gray, “The Trial of eutyches: a new interpretation,” Byzantinische Zeitschrift 101 (2008): 617–57 revise some of the previous conclusions and see only a limited influence of eutyches at court. in fact, they claim that eutyches “presented an easy target for the prosecution” in 448 that led to his condemnation (654).

16

Introduction

instead of flavian.54 however, a local council in 448 under the presidency of flavian of Constantinople had condemned eutyches for heresy—a judgment opposed by the Cyrillian party, which led to the convocation of the Council of ephesus and eutyches’s reinstatement in 449. in other words, for a very obvious reason eutyches could not participate as the representative of archimandrites at the second Council of ephesus. Thus, other monks from the house of eutyches were probably not considered suitable, as the akoimetai, the great Dyophysite opponents of eutyches and his monastery in the capital, would have immediately accused any delegate of his monastery as heretical. other miaphysite Constantinopolitan archimandrites might have been difficult to find, as most monasteries in Constantinople seem to have been Dyophysite.55 however, it seems that Theodosius may not even have considered an archimandrite from Constantinople for participation in the council. Theodosius’s letter to Barsauma indicates that the doctrinal quarrels in the near east, particularly “the impiety of nestorius,” worried the emperor: (orthodox) archimandrites in the eastern provinces had to battle with some (heretical) bishops. in the aftermath of the first Council of ephesus in 431, Cyril of alexandria and John of antioch concluded a union in order to reestablish communion between alexandria and antioch (433). however, for many bishops in the near east, this union felt like a betrayal of nestorius and the antiochene Dyophysite theology. Theodoret of Cyrrhus (423–455/60), who had led the theological opposition to Cyril before and after ephesus, only very reluctantly agreed to it. other bishops joined only after Theodoret came around, but a few of them resisted altogether, most notably the metropolitan alexander of hierapolis, who therefore—after successfully ruling hierapolis for more than thirty years!—ended his life in a mine in egypt.56 except for Cyril’s ally rabbula of edessa (411/2–435), hardly any bishop of the Oriens seems to have voluntarily agreed to nestorius’s condemnation. The union of 433

54. nestorius, Liber Heraclidis (ed. Bedjan, 460; tr. Driver and hodgson, 336); Theophanes, Chronicon am 5940 (ed. de Boor, 98; tr. mango and scott, 154). eutyches was also Chrysaphius’s godfather. for Chrysaphius, see helga scholten, Der Eunuch in Kaisernähe: Zur politischen und sozialen Bedeutung des praepositus sacri cubiculi im 4. und 5. Jahrhundert n. Chr. (frankfurt: Peter lang, 1995), 248–49. however, Bevan and gray, “The Trial of eutyches,” rightly refuse to give Theophanes much credit: in the time of Theophanes the story needed to be written in a Chalcedonian way without putting blame on emperor Theodosius (as he was considered orthodox for convening the first Council of ephesus in 431), who according to nestorius was solely behind eutyches’s rise to power. 55. for the numerical superiority of Chalcedonian versus non-Chalcedonian monks in Constantinople, see hatlie, Monks and Monasteries of Constantinople, 119–20. 56. ACO i.4, 203; for the controversy and the resistance, see the documents in the sixth-century latin collection of letters in ACO i.4.

Introduction

17

could find support of a majority of near eastern bishops only because of very outspoken patriarchal as well as imperial threats against resisting bishops.57 nevertheless, also after 433 the majority of bishops in the Oriens remained Dyophysite. in edessa, for example, rabbula’s successor ibas (435–449) was a strict Dyophysite who was also able to install relatives as bishops of Tella as well as harran.58 Cyril of alexandria, however, and succeeding him, Dioscorus (444–451), did not remain idle. The patriarchs were well aware of the fickleness of the union of 433 and worked on increasing their influence throughout the eastern empire. for this, alexandria needed allies, and recruited them among the Cyrillian monks in the eastern provinces.59 nau assumed that Barsauma was “l’ami de Dioscore.”60 This cannot be proven, but it seems likely that Dioscorus and Barsauma had been in touch before 449, as the acts of council show not only how Dioscorus crushed his ecclesiastical and theological opponents but also that the eastern monks played a vital role in this. and Barsauma had established himself as the representative of the eastern monks also in Constantinople, as simon Corcoran persuasively argues in this volume: “since Your holiness also has endured this sort of toil on behalf of the orthodox faith and appeared before our Piety.” Previous translators, like richard Price, had understood the sentence not as Barsauma being physically present before the emperor, but as the emperor (only) taking note of Barsauma’s piety.61 also Theodore anagnostes indicates a meeting of Barsauma and eutyches, which most likely took place in Constantinople.62 according to Corcoran, Barsauma had come to Constantinople before 449, and had pleaded the cause of the miaphysite monks in

57. for ecclesiastical politics in the near east in the years after 433, see most recently george a. Bevan, The New Judas: The Case of Nestorius in Ecclesiastical Politics, 428–451 CE, late antique history and religion 13 (Turnhout: Peeters, 2016), 205–79. 58. The syriac acts of the second Council of ephesus show that Dioscorus deposed the whole family: flemming, Akten der ephesinischen Synode, passim. 59. also within egypt, the patriarchs of alexandria used to rely on monks. for Dioscorus, see his letter to shenoute, on whom he relied to fight the heresy of origenism; for the letter of Dioscorus to shenoute, see herbert Thomson, “Dioscorus and shenoute,” Recueil d’études des égyptologiques (Paris: Édouard Champion, 1922), 367–76; see also alois grillmeier, “la “Peste d’origène’: soucis du patriarche d’alexandrie dus à l’apparition d’origénistes en haute Égypte (444–451),” in Alexandrina: Hellénisme, judaïsme et christianisme à Alexandrie (Paris: Cerf, 1987), 221–37. for shenoute and the various patriarchs, see samuel moawad, “The relationship of st. shenoute of atripe with his Contemporary Patriarchs of alexandria,” in Christianity and Monasticism in Upper Egypt, ed. gawdat gabra and hany n. Takla (Cairo and new York: american University in Cairo Press, 2008), 1:107–19. 60. françois nau, “résumé de monographies syriaques,” Revue de l’Orient Chrétien 8 (1913): 270. 61. Price and gaddis, 1:137; see n. 46 above. 62. Theodore anagnostes, fr. 346; Theodoros Anagnostes Kirchengeschichte, ed. günther Christian hansen (Berlin: akademie Verlag, 1971), 98.

18

Introduction

the near east against Dyophysite bishops. This may explain why Theodosius chose Barsauma to represent the monks at the council. We can also assume that this was coordinated with Dioscorus as president of the council, and that Dioscorus had played an active part in making Barsauma the ambassador of the eastern monks. at the council of 449, the bishop of alexandria condemned or deposed all bishops who potentially posed a threat to him—acting like an “uniuersalis archiepiscopus mundi” (a universal archbishop of the world), as a note in the latin translation of the acts point out;63 flavian of Constantinople, Domnus of antioch, Theodoret of Cyrrhus, and ibas of edessa, among others, all lost their sees and were expelled from the church. in order to be able to condemn all of these influential bishops, Dioscorus needed well-prepared charges, and he most probably relied on his ally Barsauma to organize and bring along miaphysite monks, who then accused their bishops at ephesus of numerous misdeeds and heresies.64 With regard to Dioscorus’s relationship with monkish leaders, scholars have always focused on eutyches. Dioscorus came to the archimandrite’s help after his condemnation in 448 and restored him at ephesus in 449. Dioscorus and eutyches’s alliance lived on in the commemoration of the Chalcedonian Church after 451, as it regarded both as condemned together by the Council of Chalcedon, although this is true only for eutyches. it is also possible that Barsauma was acquainted with eutyches and was instrumentalized by the latter for his (and Dioscorus’s) political scheme in Constantinople, as louis Duchesne and heinrich Bacht assumed.65 anagnostes, based on the acts of Chalcedon, paired eutyches and Barsauma in order to prove the latter’s heresy—a depiction that emphasizes the prominence of eutyches.66 The Council of Chalcedon was, like the Council of ephesus two years earlier, well orchestrated by the organizers, with the difference being that Dioscorus was no longer in charge, and this time things worked against Barsauma.67 The acts of

63. as the latin translator of the acts of Chalcedon phrased it; but already Bishop olympius of augaza called him “universal archbishop” = “ecumenical patriarch” at the council, a title that later would be claimed by the patriarch of Constantinople; ACO iii.1, 187. 64. This interpretation is supported by the episcopal accusation against Barsauma two years later at the Council of Chalcedon that Barsauma “incited thousands of monks against us”; ACO ii.1.2, 116 (tr. Price and gaddis, 2:156). 65. Without reference to Theodore anagnostes (see n. 62) heinrich Bacht, “Die rolle des orientalischen mönchtums in den kirchenpolitischen auseinandersetzungen um Chalkedon (431–519),” in Das Konzil von Chalkedon: Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. 2, Entscheidung um Chalkedon, ed. alois grillmeier and heinrich Bacht (Würzburg: echter, 1954), 209, based on louis Duchesne, Histoire ancienne de l’Église (Paris: fontemoing and Cie 1911), 3:398–99. 66. hansen, “ein kurzer Bericht über das Konzil von Chalkedon,” 112. 67. see now especially manuela Keßler, “Die religionspolitik des Kaisers marcianus (450–457)” (PhD diss., J.W. goethe Universität frankfurt, 2011), passim.

Introduction

19

the council show that Barsauma had lost his rank as archimandrite but still had a guest appearance—designated as a monk.68 The bishops present at this fourth session reacted aggressively and accused him of having slaughtered flavian of Constantinople and having destroyed all of syria.69 The latter can be dismissed as the usual slander levied against a prominent heretic, and the former cannot be verified, though it remains unlikely, as Palmer has discussed at length.70 Together with the Constantinopolitan archimandrites Carosus and Dorotheus, who represented the Cyrillian monks as petitioners (Barsauma was not the leader of these monks at Chalcedon), the bishops ultimately requested that the monks agree within one month to the deposition of Dioscorus and the other decisions of the council so far.71 Carosus and Dorotheus appear after the council in Pope leo’s letters in 454/5, and still opposed Chalcedon then, while Barsauma simply disappears from the record, and we no longer hear of him outside of his Life.72 he may indeed have been harassed and threatened by the Chalcedonians as the Life claims, but none of Barsauma’s deeds after 451 in the Life can be verified. Considering how the official church (and imperial magistrates) treated Barsauma at Chalcedon, his interactions with emperor marcian, Pulcheria, and other court officials, as narrated in the Life for the time after the council, are exaggerated or simply fictitious.73 The Life dates his death to 1 february, and the year is most likely 456, as the author notes that emperor marcian as well as Patriarch Proterius of alexandria died shortly afterward (§ 161.3).74 for Barsauma the Council of Chalcedon proved to be a late turning point in life: from being a leading archimandrite, and maybe the extended arm of Dioscorus, the “universal archbishop,” in the near east in 449/50, he then became a condemned heretic. Disappointment about the turn of events, and Barsauma’s anger against the church of the empire and the Christian roman empire as such, also shape the tone of the later stories in his Life to a large extent.75

68. ACO ii.1.2, 115 and 118 (tr. Price and gaddis, 2:154 and 159); maybe also stripped of his ecclesiastical rank as presbyter. 69. ACO ii.1.2, 116 (tr. Price and gaddis, 2:156). 70. Palmer, “The West-syrian monastic founder Barsawmo”; and Palmer, “a Tale of Two synods.” also the Life knows the accusation that Barsauma murdered a bishop—an accusation that Barsauma not completely denied: “i have never killed a bishop. The lord, however, will kill a priest who denies the truth” (§ 123.4). Palmer in his articles interprets this passage as Barsauma denying the charges. 71. ACO ii.1.3, 101 (tr. Price and gaddis, 2:168); here Carosus and Dorotheus are designated only as monks. maybe they had been stripped of their position as archimandrites by now as well. 72. leo, Ep. 136 and 142; Carosus is called a monk in Ep. 136 (ACO ii.4, 91). 73. see, for example, §§ 123–125 and 128: it may not be completely fictitious that the court had an eye for some of the more important monks in the city, even when the council was over. 74. Both of them died in 457. 75. menze, “The Dark side of holiness,” 242-45.

20

Introduction s C ho l a r sh i P o n Ba r s aUm a

already in the eighteenth century, Joseph assemani knew of the archimandrite, and discussed Barsauma’s involvement in the fifth-century christological controversy.76 however, it took another two centuries until françois nau, priest, mathematician, and one of the foremost syriacists of the twentieth century, introduced the Life of Barsauma properly to the scholarly community.77 in 1913 and 1914 he edited and translated some excerpts of the Life from three syriac manuscripts in the British museum (and provided summary remarks for the pieces he did not edit and translate).78 more than ten years later, he returned to Barsauma and wrote an article on Barsauma and Jewish life in Palestine focusing on Barsauma’s destruction of a synagogue, and his travels to Jerusalem, which include the famous episode (that takes up almost 10 percent of the Life) in which the Jews were allowed to return to their holy city.79 The strong anti-Jewish sentiments depicted in the Life caught the attention of a number of scholars working on ancient Judaism.80 michael avi-Yonah as well as marcel simon mentioned Barsauma—via nau’s article—in their seminal works shortly after World War ii, but he is of course also included in more recent studies, such as hagith sivan’s work on late antique Palestine.81 in Remains of the Jews andrew Jacobs specifically discusses the implications of the episode within the Christian roman empire.82 Paul Dilley uses the known parts of the Life to argue that invented Christian traditions were used in late antiq76. a more detailed account of the scholarship can be found in Palmer, “The West-syrian monastic founder Barsawmo”; dictionary entries are not discussed here, but see van rompay, “Barsawmo,” 59. Josephus s. assemanus, Bibliotheca Orientalis Clementino-Vaticana, vol. 2 (rome: Typis sacrae Congregationis de Propaganda fide, 1721 [reprint, hildesheim: olms, 1975]), no pagination; assemani’s Dissertatio de Monophysitis is followed by a short (arabic) Life of Barsauma and notes: pp. 1–10. 77. nau published more than 250 studies in the field of near eastern texts; see maurice Brière, “l’abbé françois nau,” Journal Asiatique 223 (1933): 149–80. There are already glimpses of Barsauma’s vita in michael the syrian’s Chronicle published by Jean-Baptiste Chabot in 1899–1910; see below. 78. Today these manuscripts are in the British library: add. 14732, 14734, and 12174; nau, “résumé de monographies syriaque,” Revue de l’Orient Chrėtien 8 (1913): 270–76, 379–89, and Revue de l’Orient Chrėtien 9 (1914): 113–34, 278–89. 79. françois nau, “Deux episodes de l’histoire juive sous Théodose ii (423 et 438) d’après la Vie de Barsauma le syrien,” Revue des Études Juives 83 (1927): 184–206. 80. But it is missing in steven T. Katz, ed., The Late Roman-Rabbinic Period, The Cambridge history of Judaism iV (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006). 81. marcel simon, Verus Israel: Études sur les relations entre chrétiens et juifs dans l’empire romain (135–425) (Paris: e. de Boccard, 1948), 266; michael avi-Yonah, The Jews of Palestine: A Political History from Bar Kokhba War to the Arab Conquest (oxford: Blackwell, 1976), 224–25 (first published in hebrew in 1946); hagith sivan, Palestine in Late Antiquity (oxford: oxford University Press, 2008). see also stemberger in this volume. 82. andrew s. Jacobs, Remains of the Jews: The Holy Land and Christian Empire in Late Antiquity (stanford: stanford University Press, 2004), 156–58.

Introduction

21

uity against Jews to justify illegal actions by Christian extremists.83 most recently, menze examined the image of a Jewish Jerusalem as constructed by the author for ecclesiastical reasons.84 as Barsauma participated in two councils, scholarship on church history and the ecumenical councils sometimes also makes note of him.85 since he supposedly also met with empress eudocia, Kenneth holum and anja Busch mention him in their books on the Theodosian dynasty.86 The itinerant ascetic and destroyer of non-Christian cult places also appears in studies on late antique religious violence87 and on wandering monks.88 last but not least, Barsauma has also found his way into studies on syrian monasticism.89 in this context ernest honigmann may have been the first scholar to focus on Barsauma, in 1954 offering a precise and short overview of what has been known of the historical Barsauma from the fragments of the Life as published by nau as well as from the conciliar acts.90 a few

83. Paul C. Dilley, “The invention of Christian Tradition—‘apocrypha’, imperial Policy, and antiJewish Propaganda,” Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 50 (2010): 600–601 and 612. 84. menze, “The Dark side of holiness.” 85. most recently Palmer, “a Tale of Two synods.” see also the collective study by grillmeier and Bacht, Das Konzil von Chalkedon, with the contribution by Bacht, “Die rolle des orientalischen mönchtums.” Barsauma is briefly mentioned in the modern theological standard work on the Council of Chalcedon and its reception in the fifth and sixth centuries: alois grillmeier, Jesus der Christus im Glauben der Kirche (freiburg: herder, 1979), 1:735–36 (Council of ephesus ii); and (freiburg: herder, 2004), 2.1:50 (his Vita). 86. Kenneth g. holum, Theodosian Empresses: Women and Imperial Dominion in Late Antiquity, Transformation of the Classical heritage 3 (Berkeley, los angeles, and london: University of California Press, 1982), 187 and 217–18; anja Busch, Die Frauen der theodosianischen Dynastie (stuttgart: steiner, 2015), 153–54. 87. Timothy e. gregory, Vox Populi: Violence and Popular Involvement in the Religious Controversies of the Fifth Century A.D. (Columbus: ohio state University Press, 1979), 143, 148–50, 154, 158 n. 79, 168; michael gaddis, “There Is No Crime for Those Who Have Christ”: Religious Violence in the Roman Empire, Transformation of the Classical heritage 39 (Berkeley, los angeles, and london: University of California Press, 2006), e.g., 188–89 and 246–47; Barsauma is missing in Thomas sizgorich, Violence and Belief in Late Antiquity: Militant Devotion in Christianity and Islam (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008). 88. Daniel Caner, Wandering, Begging Monks: Spiritual Authority and the Promotion of Monasticism in Late Antiquity, Transformation of the Classical heritage 33 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002). 89. Probably most thoroughly in Philippe escolan, Monachisme et église: Le monachisme syrien du ive au viie siècle; Un ministère charismatique (Paris: Beauchesne, 1999); see—among a few other paragraphs—131, 321–22 (dating the Vita to 550–605): 356–57, 359, and 371. Barsauma is missing, however, in a more recent edited volume on syrian monasticism: florence Jullien, ed., Le monachisme syriaque (Paris: geuthner, 2010). 90. honigmann, Le couvent de Barsauma, 6–23. most recently, Barsauma is also included in Todt and Vest, Syria, 2:959–87, of course focusing on the Barsauma monastery.

22

Introduction

years later in the second volume of his monumental History of Asceticism in the Syrian Orient arthur Vööbus provided a substantial introduction to Barsauma based on nau’s excerpts and supplemented by his own manuscript studies.91 T h e C o n T r i BU T io n s i n T h i s Vo lUm e

The present volume is the result of a conference on the Life of Barsauma held in münster in september 2013. We had distributed the complete (edition and) translation of the Life by andrew Palmer to participants beforehand and asked colleagues to cover certain topics. Therefore, rather than being simply an edited conference volume, the resulting volume attempts to be the first comprehensive introduction to Barsauma and his Life in modern scholarship. in chapter 1, “Barsauma and the emperors,” simon Corcoran details the saint’s relationship with Constantinople and the imperial protagonists. Corcoran analyzes the imperial documents and correspondence from the time of the second Council of ephesus in 449, to which Theodosius invited Barsauma. he also discusses the episode in the Life in which the emperor gives Barsauma his seal ring, Barsauma’s stay in Constantinople, and his interactions there with several persons of high standing. While Barsauma’s importance and his stay in Constantinople can be regarded as historical, the hagiographer had no intimate knowledge of it and embellishes his hero’s deeds and his interactions with persons from the imperial court. in chapter 2, “ascetic history and rhetoric in the Life of Barsauma,” Cornelia horn situates the archimandrite within the context of late antique syrian asceticism. her particular focus is Barsauma as “mourner,” but for her discussion, she not only includes the Life’s description of Barsauma but also analyzes the official conciliar documents for comparison. on account of his ascetic achievements, Barsauma was chosen to represent monks at the second Council of ephesus, and horn discusses in detail Barsauma’s appearance (clothing, hairstyle, etc.) as well as the saint’s fasting practices. notably, he had already begun some of his practices in childhood, and these, including weeping, stayed with him his whole life. as horn shows, Barsauma was not only a highly influential archimandrite but also, and first of all, a “man of tears.” from situating Barsauma and the Life in the context of syrian asceticism, we move on to Palestine and its religious quarrels in late antiquity in chapter 3, günter stemberger’s “Barsauma’s Travels to the holy land and Jewish history.” stemberger has made use of françois nau’s fragments of the Life in his previous publications but with the full Life at hand, he is able to review some aspects of the author’s knowledge of geography as well as Jewish history. he details Barsauma’s journeys to

91. Vööbus, History of Asceticism in the Syrian Orient, 2:196–208.

Introduction

23

Jerusalem and possible routes according to the topographical information in the Life. his main focus, however, is Barsauma’s destructive zeal toward synagogues and Jewish life in Palestine. Barsauma’s key actions against Jews are often a matter of speculation, as we are lacking literary (and archaeological) sources. The author of the Life may have used narrative patterns from biblical or hagiographic models to fit the life of his saint. The symbolic meaning of the saint’s deeds against Judaism certainly becomes obvious to the reader of the Life. in chapter 4, “Barsauma, eudocia, Jerusalem, and the Temple mount,” Jan Willem Drijvers focuses on Barsauma’s supposedly fourth and last stay in Jerusalem. This is the famous episode in which the Jews returned to Jerusalem and convened for the feast of Tabernacles. Drijvers discusses the history of the Temple mount as contested religious area: this story in the Life should be read against Christian fears after emperor Julian the apostate’s (361–363) attempt to rebuild the Jewish temple in Jerusalem, an episode that found its literary manifestation in the syriac Julian Romance. Drijvers places the Life in this context of syriac anti-Jewish texts and regards empress eudocia’s legal implementations as well as Barsauma’s response as fictional. While both stemberger and Drijvers are (partially) concerned with the question of the historicity of Barsauma and the Life, reuven Kiperwasser and serge ruzer analyze the narrative strategies of the author. in chapter 5, “Cleansing the sacred space: The holy land and its inhabitants in the Pilgrimage narrative of Barsauma,” they point out that Barsauma was already an accomplished ascetic when he arrived in the holy land. There, however, Barsauma needed to prove his authority and miraculous powers against the “Jewish other” and Jewish claims on the holy places. in the long story of Barsauma’s fourth journey to Jerusalem, the Life bears witness to the clash between a Christian and a Jewish narrative concerning the Temple mount. however, Barsauma also needed to stand up against (what would later be Chalcedonian) clerics who (along with eudocia and imperial officials) sided with the Jews. The narrative strategy of the alleged Jewish reconquista of Jerusalem serves a non-Chalcedonian agenda. The historicity of this event remains doubtful, but Kiperwasser and ruzer compare the story in the Life with a rabbinic midrashic anthology, the genesis rabbah, in order to point to parallels in messianic activism as observed by the respective Christian and Jewish authors. in chapter 6, “samaritans in the Life of Barsauma,” Johannes hahn analyzes the two episodes that feature the samaritans (§§ 80 and 84). Barsauma’s encounters with this group are more peaceful than with other religious groups. The mention of a remarkable topographical detail in sebaste, the traditional samaritan center— namely, the city’s aqueduct—suggests the historical authenticity of the original episode, which in the Life, by the way of a remarkably informed theological discourse with a samaritan “teacher of the law” (and a miracle), leads to the conversion of samaritans. only here does Barsauma appear as a kind of successful

24

Introduction

peaceful missionary, rather than a violent ascetic zealot as he is portrayed elsewhere in the Life. These episodes are highly important for the reconstruction of the Life’s genesis and chronology. The total lack of awareness of the disruptive religious and political effects of the samaritan revolts of 484, 529, and 555/6 should exclude a late origin or later revision of this tradition. This points to an early formation of at least these parts of the text, immediately or soon after the saint’s death, as the hagiographer himself claims. fifteen years ago, Daniel Caner published the book Wandering, Begging Monks in which he discussed the phenomenon of itinerant monks. in that book Caner focused on the greek Life of Alexander the Sleepless and made only a few references to Barsauma; however, in chapter 7 of the present volume, “Wandering monks remembered: hagiography in the Lives of alexander the sleepless and Barsauma the mourner,” he offers a comparative analysis. While both Lives can be considered apologetic, the two hagiographies differ in a number of details. in this volume Caner emphasizes Barsauma’s physical penance in particular, which makes the saint a rather unusual but also highly memorable holy man. We are well aware that this volume does not cover all of the topics that arise from the Life, and certainly not all questions can be satisfactorily answered. We nevertheless very much hope that the present volume helps to spark interest in the study of Barsauma and the fascinating text that is the Life of Barsauma.

1

Barsauma and the emperors simon Corcoran

Barsauma’s visits to Constantinople and interactions with the emperors and their officials are key features in the later part of the narrative in the Life that help to define Barsauma as a champion of true orthodoxy from the non-Chalcedonian viewpoint. These episodes also deal with persons and events attested in other ancient evidence and so can enable us to assess the author’s sources, knowledge, and intentions in managing, manipulating, or even inventing his material. for the purposes of this study, i presume that the sections about Barsauma and the emperors have a single author, and sidestep any debates about interpolated or revised chapters. my analysis is divided into three sections. in the first i discuss the relations between Barsauma and Theodosius ii (r. 402–450), in particular the Barsauma letters issued in the context of the second Council of ephesus. in the second, i discuss the contrasting situation of relations between Barsauma and the court and officials of marcian (r. 450– 457) and his wife, Pulcheria (augusta 414–453), and the events surrounding the Council of Chalcedon. The final section is much briefer, considering the Life’s unusual view of Valentinian iii (r. 425–455). i pass over another imperial, the augusta eudocia, since she appears with a rather different role in a distinct part of the Life concerning Barsauma’s interactions with the Jews in the holy land, which episodes are well discussed in Jan Willem Drijver’s chapter in this volume. Ba r s aUm a a n D T h e o D o si U s i i

Theodosius ii is unequivocally portrayed in the Life as a hero of orthodoxy, who correctly recognizes, understands, and rewards Barsauma’s sanctity (§§ 104–105, 107.3), refuses to believe the accusations made against him (§§ 111–112), and steadfastly 25

26

Simon Corcoran

maintains correct Christological attitudes, although inconveniently dying before he can promulgate a last definitive statement of right belief (§ 113). Theodosius is indeed a most unusual figure in the disputes of the times, since he ends up orthodox in the view of both sides of the Chalcedonian divide.1 in the Chalcedonian tradition, he is the emperor of the first Council of ephesus (431), the third of the ecumenical councils, therefore a promoter of legitimate orthodoxy and an opponent of nestorianism. for the non-Chalcedonians, he is also an opponent of nestorianism, which he is seen as further opposing at the second Council of ephesus (449), whose decisions he ratified and promulgated, and which define him as truly orthodox thereafter, as he is aligned with heroes such as Dioscorus of alexandria. his death in 450, with the ramifications of ephesus ii still unresolved, allows both sides to claim him. for the one side (the Chalcedonians) could blame ephesus ii upon others, such as the eunuch Chrysaphius, an archetypal evil counselor,2 with the implication that Theodosius himself would have held a Chalcedonesque council in due course anyway. The other side, by contrast, could regard him as an unwavering champion of their (anti-Chalcedonian = anti-nestorian) orthodoxy, who would never have abandoned the right decisions of ephesus ii. it is the latter Theodosius, of course, to which the author of the Life subscribes and which he presents so clearly. Barsauma’s interactions with Theodosius begin in the later part of the Life, and toward the end of the long reign of Theodosius ii, and can be summarized as follows. They start with a visit (§ 103.3–105.4) in the aftermath of the killing of Zachariah of samosata (§ 103.2). Theodosius experiences Barsauma’s holiness firsthand,3 as Barsauma avoids accepting lavish imperial beneficence, so that the i should like to thank Johannes hahn for inviting me to contribute to this volume, and to both him and andrew Palmer for their comments on my drafts. Thanks for advice and information are owed also to george Bevan, Philip forness, geoffrey greatrex, rudolph haensch, Dominic moreau, richard Price, Benet salway, and Philip Wood; also to those who responded helpfully to my presentation at the second “acts of the Church Councils” workshop held at Bamberg, July 2016. 1. edward Watts, “Theodosius ii and his legacy in anti-Chalcedonian Communal memory,” in Theodosius II: Rethinking the Roman Empire in Late Antiquity, ed. Christopher Kelly (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 269–70. 2. for blame attached to Chrysaphius in the Chalcedonian tradition, see rusticus’s translation of Theodosius’s letter confirming ephesus ii (ACO ii.3, 347; Price and gaddis, 3:190; Coleman-norton, Roman State and Christian Church [ = RSCC], 2:763; liberatus, Breviarium Xi.63 and Xii.73 (ACO ii.5, 114, 117); evag., Hist. eccl. i.10, 2.2 (Whitby, Ecclesiastical History, 27, 61); Theophanes, Chronographia am 5940–5942 (ed. de Boor, 98–102; tr. mango and scott, 153–58); cf. günter gentz, and friedhelm Winkelmann, Die Kirchengeschichte des Nicephorus Callistus Xanthopulus und ihre Quellen (Berlin: akademie, 1966),139–40. The Chalcedonian chanting of 518 identified the eunuch amantius as a new Chrysaphius (alexander a. Vasiliev, Justin the First [Cambridge, ma: harvard University Press, 1950], 141). note also the discussion by george a. Bevan and Patrick T. r. gray, “The Trial of eutyches: a new interpretation,” Byzantinische Zeitschrift 101 (2008): 621–23. 3. according to the Life (§§ 89.1, 96.12), Theodosius had already heard of some of Barsauma’s actions.

Barsauma and the Emperors

27

emperor proceeds to offer him the see of antioch, which Barsauma also declines, again reinforcing his aura of piety (§§ 105.1–2, 106.3). Theodosius then asks him to govern the whole church, and gives him his seal ring ostensibly for use in correspondence to him, in fact granting him the emperor’s own authority. some time later (the chronology is typically vague), Theodosius, having summoned the Council of ephesus, writes to the bishops there, asking them to admit Barsauma to their sessions (§ 106). The Life describes Barsauma as taking the leading role in the proceedings, before returning home (§ 107.1–2). Theodosius then summons Barsauma back to Constantinople, entrusts him with the task of overseeing the election of a new bishop of antioch (§ 107.3), and promulgates through the provinces a sacra (an imperial missive)4 declaring Barsauma’s general authority (§ 108). While Barsauma is in antioch, a pagan general is stirred up by envious clergy against both Barsauma and the emperor, but, as predicted by Barsauma, he soon dies after a fall from his horse (§ 109). next, after false accusations against Barsauma of luxury and corruption, which the emperor does not believe (§ 111), Barsauma visits Constantinople to defend himself, but is exonerated by the emperor (§ 112), who then writes another approving sacra about Barsauma and the true faith (§ 113.1). Theodosius then dies, a latter-day Josiah (2 Kings 22:18–20) spared the coming catastrophe of Chalcedon (§ 113.2–4).5 What are we to make of the chronology and indeed content of these interactions between emperor and monk? Two fixed points are the Council of ephesus (august 449) and the death of Theodosius (July 450). The succession of bishops at samosata is poorly known, so that the death of Zachariah, who is attested only in the Life, provides no chronological indication for the first meeting.6 During that visit, there comes the offer of the see of antioch, which Barsauma refuses. This offer must be fictitious. for the see of antioch to be vacant and available, this visit would have had to be ca. 441/2, when John i of antioch died. however, the dynastic succession of John’s nephew Domnus seems to have been swift and inevitable.7 alternatively, we would have to suppose that Theodosius was anticipating a 4. for the term sacra, see avshalom laniado, “abba ammonathas et son miracle: fiscalité, diplomatique et sainteté en Égypte byzantine,” in Mélanges Jean Gascou: Textes et études papyrologiques (P. Gascou) ed. Jean-luc fournet and arietta Papaconstantinou, Travaux et mémoires 20.1 (Paris: association des amis du Centre d’histoire et civilisation de Byzance, 2016), 597–611, at 601–3. 5. By a strange coincidence, Theodosius himself is later coupled with Josiah as law-giving exempla for Charles the Bald (Bn Par. lat. 1152 f.3v); anne-orange Poilpré, “Charles le Chauve trônant et la majestas Domini: réflexion à propos de trois manuscrits,” Histoire de l’Art 55 (2004): 45–54. 6. menze suggests he was bishop ca. 446/8 (see the introduction to this volume). 7. Downey, A History of Antioch, 466; Johan leemans et al., Episcopal Elections in Late Antiquity, arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte 119 (Berlin: de gruyter, 2011), 13; adam m. schor, Theodoret’s People: Social Networks and Religious Conflict in Late Roman Syria, Transformation of the Classical heritage 48 (Berkeley and los angeles: University of California Press, 2011), 113–14.

28

Simon Corcoran

vacancy after the coming council at ephesus, since the letters about ephesus seem to follow soon after the first meeting.8 given Barsauma’s refusal of the see, however, Theodosius in the aftermath of the council entrusts him rather with the election of a new bishop of antioch. The see was indeed vacant after the deposition of Domnus at ephesus, but far from there being a local synod to choose the new bishop, Dioscorus of alexandria moved to have maximus consecrated by the new bishop of Constantinople, anatolius (also his nominee), probably in the last month or so of 449.9 Therefore, the idea that Barsauma was ever offered the see of antioch during the 440s, or commissioned to hold a synod to appoint a new bishop in 449, or indeed was granted wide powers in syria seems unlikely. ernest honigmann suggests that the intention in the Life is to make Barsauma appear as if he were in effect the first miaphysite patriarch of antioch,10 although the degree of hindsight necessary for this wishful thinking depends on when the Life is dated. an important feature of the first meeting is that Theodosius, having made a request for Barsauma to govern the church more generally, follows up by giving Barsauma a seal ring as a gift, which the Life states was the emperor’s personal ring, so that he was in fact bestowing his own authority upon an unsuspecting Barsauma (§ 105.3–4), and this is made explicit in the emperor’s later letter to the bishops at ephesus (§ 106.4).11 Thus anything sealed with the ring by Barsauma would in fact be an imperial command. at first sight, the core premise of the story does not seem so remarkable, if perhaps exaggerated, given the ubiquity of seals and sealing practices across the near east and the mediterranean throughout antiquity.12 The idea that the emperor might give a ring, even a ring from his own finger, as a gift hardly appears implausible. indeed, a garnet intaglio ring survives,

8. note the comments by michael gaddis, There Is No Crime for Those Who Have Christ: Religious Violence in the Roman Empire, Transformation of the Classical heritage 39 (Berkeley, los angeles, and london: University of California Press, 2006), 298. 9. henry Chadwick, “The exile and Death of flavian of Constantinople,” Journal of Theological Studies, n.s., 6 (1955): 25; Price and gaddis, 1:38; Peter norton, Episcopal Elections (250–600): Hierarchy and Popular Will in Late Antiquity (oxford: oxford University Press, 2007), 88–89. 10. ernest honigmann, Le couvent de Barsauma et le patriarcat jacobite d’Antioche et de Syrie, CsCo 146, subsidia 7 (louvain: imprimerie orientaliste l. Durbecq, 1954), 20; noted also by menze in the introduction to this volume. 11. The ring is not mentioned in the imperial sacra circulated to the cities explaining the position and power given to Barsauma (§ 108.2–4). The ring and its use are sometimes picked out in later derivative versions of Barsauma’s life: thus, present in an arabic text (Le synaxaire arabe jacobite, ed. and tr. Basset, 808), but absent from an ethiopic one (grébaut, “Vie de Barsoma le syrien,” 344–45). 12. ilona regulski et al., eds., Seals and Sealing Practices in the Near East: Developments in Administration and Magic from Prehistory to the Islamic Period, orientalia lovaniensia analecta 219 (louvain: Peeters, 2012).

Barsauma and the Emperors

29

figure 1.1. garnet intaglio seal ring

(mid-5th century aD). ferrell Collection: Photograph ©Bruce m. White 2010.

with a frontal imperial portrait surrounded by the retrograde legend † Dn TheoDosiVs aVg (fig. 1.1).13 The emperor is identified as Theodosius ii, rather than his grandfather, Theodosius the great, and the ring (band, mounting, and jewel) is regarded as stylistically suitable for the mid- to late fifth century. since this ring is clearly intended to be a seal ring, does it not lend support to the verisimilitude of this episode? i think not. such a ring could be a prestigious gift14—emperors are famous gift-givers. But this is no authoritative imperial seal, precisely because the emperors do not appear to have used one. although emperors used seals of various formats for official business both in the early Principate15 and much later in the

13. “D(ominus) n(oster) Theodosius aug(ustus).” Jeffrey spier, Late Antique and Early Christian Gems (Wiesbaden: reichert, 2007), 25 no. 76; and spier, Treasures of the Ferrell Collection (Wiesbaden: reichert, 2010), cat. no. 47. 14. spier, Treasures, 7; cf. Constantinian gift-rings (e.g., RIB ii.2422.4 and 7). 15. e.g., Dio Cassius 53.30.1–2, 66.2.2; suetonius, Div. Aug. 50; CIL Vi 2078 = 32374 lines 30–34. see the discussion in rudolf haensch, “Die Verwendung von siegeln bei Dokumenten der kaiserzeitlichen reichsadministration,” in Archives et sceaux du monde hellénistique, ed. marie-françoise Boussac and antonio invernizzi, BCh supplement 29 (athens: École française d’athçnes 1996 [1997]), 449–96.

30

Simon Corcoran

Byzantine era,16 there is almost no evidence for this in the intervening period. instead the key action that the emperor takes, which bestows authority upon a document, is to subscribe it in his own hand, writing a valedictory formula or some other wording.17 The only surviving original imperial document is actually a fragment of a letter of Theodosius ii to the dux of the Thebaid and contains precisely such an autograph subscription.18 laws speak of the importance of the subscription, while leaving seals unmentioned.19 infrequent surviving sealings (generally lead) bearing imperial images before the sixth century seem to represent only low-level officials sealing fiscal goods or related documents.20 This imperial deficiency may seem counterintuitive, given the prevalence of seals in other late antique contexts, mostly private, but including also the use of seal rings by the germanic successor kings.21 however, it is perhaps significant to note that, in a similar way, the handwritten superscription, invoking the Deity, became the key element in bestowing authority upon formal documents of the abbasid and fatimid caliphs.22 Thus a late roman emperor did not possess an official “imperial seal.” it is certainly possible that Theodosius gave Barsauma the gift of a ring with an intaglio, perhaps one with an appropriate Christian design.23 But it seems likely that the 16. andreas e. müller, “Documents: imperial Chrysobulls,” in The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies, ed. elizabeth Jeffreys et al. (oxford: oxford University Press, 2008), 129–35; Constantine Vii, De ceremoniis ii.48 (tr. moffatt and Tall, 686–92). for the late Byzantine parakoimomenos tes sphendones (keeper of the signet), see ruth macrides et al., eds., Pseudo-Kodinos and the Constantinopolitan Court: Offices and Ceremonies (farnham: ashgate, 2013), 86–89. 17. simon Corcoran, “state Correspondence in the roman empire: imperial Communication from augustus to Justinian,” in State Correspondence in the Ancient World from New Kingdom Egypt to the Roman Empire, ed. Karen radner (new York: oxford University Press, 2014), 194–95; Josef grisar and fernando de lasala, Aspetti della sigillografia: Tipologia, storia, materia e valore giuridico (rome: Pontificia Università gregoriana, 1997), 17. 18. Sammelbuch XX 14606 and Chartae Latinae Antiquiores XlVi 1392. see Denis feissel and Klaas a. Worp, “la requête d’appion, évêque de syène, à Théodose ii: Papyrus leidensis Z révisé,” Oudheidkundige Mededelingen uit het Rijksmuseum van Oudheden te Leiden 68 (1988): 97–111. 19. CJ i.23.3 and 6; i.30.3. 20. e.g., early third-century egyptian customs receipt at P. Mich. Inv. 5763 = Sammelbuch Vi 9234 = P. Customs no. 282; fifth-century sealing of a sack at John nesbitt, ed., Catalogue of Byzantine Seals at Dumbarton Oaks and in the Fogg Museum of Art (Washington, DC: Dumbarton oaks, 2009), vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 4–6. 21. Corcoran, “state Correspondence,” 195–96. note the Visigothic king Theudis sealing and subscribing at Toledo (Karl Zeumer, Leges Visigothorum, monumenta germaniae historica, leg. nat. germ. 1 [hannover: hahn, 1902], 467–69). 22. samuel m. stern, Fātimid Decrees: Original Documents from the Fātimid Chancery (london: faber and faber, 1964), ch. 9. see also geoffrey a. Khan, “a Copy of a Decree from the archives of the fātimid Chancery in egypt,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 49 (1986): 439–53. 23. Christian gems: spier, Late Antique and Early Christian Gems, chs. 3–6.

Barsauma and the Emperors

31

figure 1.2. giambattista Tiepolo, Joseph Receiving Pharaoh’s Ring (ca. 1733–1735). Dulwich Picture gallery (DPg158). image: google art Project from Wikimedia Commons.

author had little genuine knowledge of the emperor’s sealing practices, but was rather inspired by a biblical exemplum—namely, the story in genesis of Joseph receiving Pharaoh’s ring, and in consequence his authority (genesis 41:42).24 This is noted twice, in the original account and again in the emperor’s letter to the Council of ephesus (§ 106.4). While the appropriateness of the story may seem obvious, the incident of the seal ring from genesis is not one that is much rehearsed in later texts, commented on by Christian exegetes, or depicted in art then or later.25 a rare example is the recently restored painting by Tiepolo in the Dulwich Picture gallery in south london (fig. 1.2).26 in syriac literature, however, the episode does have a certain purchase. ephrem of nisibis, in the fourth century, includes Joseph and the royal ring in his genesis commentary.27 The story of Joseph was retold in an early fifth-century syriac 24. The ring is called daktulion (anulus in the Vulgate latin); cf. Philo, Somn. 2.44 (loeb ed., 5:462). Derivative texts sometimes use instead sphragis (latin: signaculum): Philo, De Iosepho 21.120 (loeb ed., 6:198); Josephus, Ant. Jud. 2.90 (plus latin at franz Blatt, The Latin Josephus [aarhus: Universitetsforlaget, 1958], 1:181). 25. it is not among topics depicted on gems (spier, Late Antique and Early Christian Gems). 26. https://www.dulwichpicturegallery.org.uk/explore-the-collection/151–200/joseph-receivingpharaohs-ring/. 27. ephrem syrus, Comm. in Gen. XXXV.6 (Tonneau, Sancti Ephraem Syri in Genesim et in Exodum Commentarii, 84; mathews, St. Ephrem the Syrian, 186–67); cf. van rompay, Le commentaire GenèseExode 9,32, 148.

32

Simon Corcoran

version, which proved influential upon later homilists.28 Those syriac homilists, who treat specifically of Joseph and also mention the ring in this regard, include Balai of Qenneshrin (in the early fifth century) and Ps.-narsai,29 although apparently not the prolific Jacob of serugh.30 maybe Theodosius did give Barsauma a ring as a gift. Perhaps the author had seen imperial images on sealed goods or a fine intaglio. What the author certainly knew was his Bible and syriac writing on Joseph and Pharaoh. much about Barsauma’s first and most important meeting with Theodosius (antioch, the seal ring), therefore, is historically suspect as portrayed in the Life. immediately afterward, however, comes the account of the second Council of ephesus and Barsauma’s involvement, which can be compared to the extensive material that survives for this council in other sources. The account starts with a reference to Theodosius writing letters to the bishops summoning them to ephesus (§ 106.1). one such letter survives, that to Dioscorus of alexandria, both as later quoted at Chalcedon,31 and in the independently preserved acts of ephesus.32 Then follows the sacra of Theodosius sent to the bishops assembled at ephesus, asking them to admit Barsauma to the council. This letter is given verbatim in the Life, one of only two imperial letters so fully reported in a documentary manner. Unlike the other example (§ 108.2–4), which lacks a parallel version, in this case there is plentiful comparative information for attempting a nuanced analysis. The first section of the letter in the Life (§ 106.2) reads as follows: Theodosius and Valentinian, the Christian emperors, to all the true bishops of the Catholic Church, warm greetings! i inform the holy synod of the priests of god that Barsauma, the monastic leader, has been chosen by god. You know, better than we do, 28. Kristian s. heal, “The syriac history of Joseph: a new Translation and introduction,” in Old Testament Pseudepigrapha: More Noncanonical Scriptures, ed. richard Bauckham et al. (grand rapids, mi: eerdmans, 2013), 1:85–120 (the ring at ch. 23, p. 105). 29. Balai of Qenneshrin, Homilies on Joseph 6, 7, and 12 (at P. Bedjan, ed., Histoire complète de Joseph par Sainte Ephrem [Paris and leipzig: otto harrassowitz, 1891], 130, 154, 175, and 335); cf. robert Phenix, The Sermons on Joseph of Balai of Qenneshrin (Tübingen: mohr siebeck, 2008), 135, 246, 274; Ps.-narsai, Homilies on Joseph 1, at P. Bedjan, ed., Liber Superiorum seu historia monastica, Liber fundatorum monasteriorum in regno Persarum et Arabum, Homiliae Mar-Narsetis in Joseph, Documenta Patrum de quibusdam verae fidei dogmatibus (Paris and leipzig: otto harrassowitz, 1901), 603. i am grateful to Philip forness for searching out these references. 30. Philip forness tells me he has failed to find mention of the ring in Jacob’s memre (verse homilies) on Joseph. see also Kristian s. heal, “a note on Jacob of sarug’s memre on Joseph,” Hugoye 14 (2011): 215–23; and now forness’s new book, Preaching Christology in the Roman Near East: A Study of Jacob of Serugh (oxford: oxford University Press, 2018), ch. 1. 31. in greek and latin: Acts of Chalcedon i.24 (ACO ii.1, 68–69 and ii.3, 42–43; Price and gaddis, 1:132–34; Coleman-norton, RSCC 2:747–49, no. 449). 32. in syriac: flemming, Akten der ephesinischen Synode, 2–5; Perry, Second Synod of Ephesus, 3–7 (trans. from Bm add. 14530). in latin: Collectio Novariensis de re Eutychis 10.1 (ACO ii.2.1, 42–44).

Barsauma and the Emperors

33

that he is true in his faith and respectable in his orthodoxy; perfect in his good deeds and complete in the fear of god; luminous in knowledge and excellent in wisdom; full of zeal and complete in love; pure from corruption and free from the respect of persons; unsoiled by the love of mammon; a lover of mankind, and a servant of god, trusted by Christ with the stewardship of the apostles. What is more, great signs like those of the apostles are performed through his agency.

The next two sections go on to recount Theodosius’s encounter with Barsauma, including the offer of antioch and the grant of the ring, ending with the wish that Barsauma partake in the synod. We are fortunate that there exist independent copies of this letter, in a version addressed individually to Dioscorus of alexandria. This is preserved in the original greek in the acts of the Council of Chalcedon in which parts of the proceedings at ephesus were read out, and in a latin translation of the same.33 There are also syriac and latin translations from versions of the acts of the Council of ephesus, not mediated via their reuse at Chalcedon.34 Dioscorus was not the only bishop to receive such a letter, since mention is made of a similar (presumably identical) letter addressed to Juvenal of Jerusalem.35 There was no collective letter to the assembled bishops, but Dioscorus’s letter was read out to them during the first session. it reads as follows: The emperors Caesars Theodosius and Valentinian, mightiest victors and triumphers, the Augusti, to Dioscorus.36 it has come to the hearing of our gentleness that many of the most reverent archimandrites across the east together with the orthodox peoples are disgusted by certain bishops in some of the oriental cities said to be sick with the impiety of nestorius and are struggling against them on behalf of the orthodox faith. for this reason, therefore, it has seemed good to our Divinity that the most god-fearing priest and archimandrite Barsauma, renowned for purity of life and orthodox faith, is to appear at the city of the ephesians and, acting in the place of all the most god-fearing archimandrites in the orient, to sit down with Your holiness and all the most holy fathers gathered together there and so to decree things pleasing to god in all matters. Therefore, let Your Piety, seeing that all our thought is concerned with the orthodox faith, gladly receive the aforementioned most reverent archimandrite and facilitate his joining in your holy synod. Given on the Ides of May at Therallum, in the consulship of Protogenes, vir clarissimus, and of him who is to be announced (15 may 449).

33. Acts of Chalcedon i.47 (text), 108 (reference) (ACO ii.1, 71 (greek) and ii.3, 46 and 60 (latin); Price and gaddis, 1:136–37, 150; cf. Coleman-norton, RSCC 2:750–51, no. 451). 34. Perry, Second Synod, 405 (trans. from Bm add. 12156); Collectio Novariensis 10.10 (ACO ii.2.1, 44–45). 35. Acts of Chalcedon i.47, 109 (with details in the two previous notes). 36. This is the latin heading (Collectio Novariensis 10.10 [ACO ii.2.1, 44]). no greek heading survives. Perry (Second Synod, 405) translates the syriac thus: “The autocrat Caesars Theodosius and Valentinian, Victors and illustrious by Victories, the noble, the Worshipful, the augusti, to Dioscorus.”

34

Simon Corcoran

it is clear that there is a connection between this letter and the letter in the Life, although this comprises loose echoes, rather than the true verbatim citation of letters we often get in ecclesiastical histories or Christological polemic. four things are similar: (1) Theodosius and Valentinian are named jointly in the heading, although neither imperial titles nor addressees tally; (2) Barsauma is orthodox in faith; (3) Barsauma is pure in life; (4) Barsauma is included in the council. further, immediately after the version of the letter in the Life, the bishops are described as greeting Barsauma with gladness (§ 106.5), which may pick up the instruction in the final sentence of the genuine letter. The reference in the original letter to the struggles in the east against “nestorians” is omitted in the Life, where two lengthy sections are added that reflect the preceding narrative in the Life, discussing what happened when the two met. The further statement that Barsauma’s word is to sway the decision of the council is reflected in the subsequent narrative, which, while acknowledging the roles of Dioscorus and (the unnamed) Juvenal, gives the key position to Barsauma. all this is given in the first-person singular, in contrast to the plural heading and the first part of the letter, and indeed the later sacra (§ 108.2). Collegiate plurals are almost universal in imperial letters, so that even in sole reigns this can become the “majestic plural.” sometimes the singular is used for emphasis, or in letters between emperors, but generally it becomes rare and unusual.37 The singular in this text, therefore, is not what we would expect from an imperial letter. What is notable, however, is that the Life does not mention that, in addition to the letter to Dioscorus, there was a letter from Theodosius to Barsauma himself, inviting him to participate at ephesus. This is known in the original greek as quoted from the acts of ephesus at Chalcedon, and in a latin translation therefrom.38 This letter appears to have survived only via Chalcedon, since it does not appear in syriac translations of the ephesus material,39 nor in an independent latin collection.40 no syriac version is currently known.41 This may explain why 37. simon Corcoran, The Empire of the Tetrarchs, rev. ed. (oxford: Clarendon Press, 2000), 318–23; Corcoran, “state Correspondence,” 192–93. 38. Acts of Chalcedon i.48 (ACO ii.1, 71 and ii.3, 46; Price and gaddis, 1:137; Coleman-norton, RSCC 2:749–50, no. 450). andrew Palmer, “a Tale of Two synods: The archimandrite Barsumas at ephesus in 449 and at Chalcedon in 451,” Journal of Eastern Christian Studies 66 (2014): 40 provides a new translation of the letter. 39. it is not noted by Wright in his catalogue entry on Bm add. 12156 (Catalogue of Syriac Manuscripts, 643). neither does it appear among Perry’s translations from the same (An Ancient Syriac Document, ed. Perry, 22–23), where only the Chalcedonian latin version is quoted). Philip Wood has kindly checked the manuscript in the British library on my behalf (June 2016) and confirms that the letter to Barsauma does not appear there. 40. The fact that the latin Collectio Novariensis (ACO ii.2.1) does not include the letter to Barsauma, but only that to Dioscorus, supports its derivation from a version of the acts of ephesus similar to the syriac. 41. Coleman-norton (RSCC 2:749) refers to a syriac version of this letter, but gives no source, and is probably mistaken.

Barsauma and the Emperors

35

the author of the Life appears unaware of this letter of invitation. as regards Barsauma himself, his primary language was clearly syriac, which he is shown speaking and subscribing at ephesus, although it is not clear that he lacked all competence in greek.42 emperors never wrote in syriac, even to greekless syriac speakers, while, at this period, latin in the east was largely confined to laws or other letters or documents within the higher administration.43 Writing to Barsauma in greek was the default. The letter was sent one day before that to Dioscorus (14 may), with which it overlaps substantially. however, the second half is worth quoting for one important point (the translation and the emphasis are mine): Therefore, since Your holiness also has endured this sort of toil on behalf of the orthodox faith and appeared before Our Piety (καὶ ἡ σὴ ἁγιωσύνη διὰ τὴν ᾽ορθόδοξον πίστιν τοσοῦτον ὑπομεμένηκεν κάματον καὶ πρὸς τὴν ἡμετέραν εὐσέβειαν παρεγένετο), We think it right for Your holiness, renowned for purity of life and orthodox faith, to arrive at the city of the ephesians and, acting in the place of all the most god-fearing archimandrites in the east, to sit with the holy synod decreed to assemble there and to decree things pleasing to god with the other holy fathers and bishops.

Both richard Price and michael gaddis and Paul Coleman-norton44 translate to the effect that this toil has come to the emperor’s notice. This is certainly an unremarkable thing for the emperor to say, but it is not what i think the greek, as transmitted, says. andrew Palmer takes this slightly differently, following perhaps the latin version (“et tua sanctitas pro catholica fide tantum laborem sustinuit, ut ad nostram perueniret pietatem”), to translate thus: “your holiness has also endured, on behalf of the orthodox faith, the very considerable toil of paying a visit to our Piety.”45 The scale of the toil is so great precisely because of the journey to see the emperor. it is certainly true that a lengthy journey to the imperial court was regarded as onerous and could earn someone relief from local civic burdens in recognition of this.46 however, i think the greek is clear enough, if not exactly elegant. Barsauma has struggled in his home region in the east, like the other archimandrites, but he (“his holiness”) has in addition come before the emperor.47 it is notable that the same greek word denoting his personal appearance is used in the 42. fergus millar, A Greek Roman Empire: Power and Belief under Theodosius II (408–450), sather Classical lectures 64 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2006), 110–15. 43. Best discussed by millar, Greek Roman Empire, ch. 1. 44. Price and gaddis, 1:137; Coleman-norton, RSCC 2:750, no. 450. 45. Palmer, “a Tale of Two synods,” 40. 46. e.g., CJ X.65.3; Corcoran, The Empire of the Tetrarchs, 119–22. 47. The third-person singular verb is governed by “Your holiness,” not the “toil.” richard Price kindly indicated agreement with my translation in response to my presentation at the Bamberg workshop (July 2016).

36

Simon Corcoran

Dioscorus letter of Barsauma traveling to ephesus (παρεγένεσθαι), which tends to support a literal interpretation of him coming before the emperor. This therefore provides a coincidence with the Life, supporting the reality of a personal meeting between emperor and archimandrite at some point before the Council of ephesus. Was there need for an interpreter when Barsauma had an audience with Theodosius or did he speak enough greek for simple conversation or reportage, as opposed to Christological subtleties? one way or another, Barsauma was able not only to give a personal account to the emperor of the situation in the east and of his experiences and feats there, but also to demonstrate his personal qualities directly in the imperial presence. This then explains why it was Barsauma, who was given the personal mandate to attend the council, as the sole archimandrite to represent all the others from the east, which point is made also in the letter to Dioscorus (where Barsauma’s visit itself is not mentioned). The inclusion of Barsauma in the council seems to have been the emperor’s personal enthusiasm.48 The emperor took this further. responding to events in edessa in april 449, the emperor decided that a dozen further monks, whom he had not met, were also to be allowed to attend the council. Perhaps he was acquiring a taste for this conciliar innovation.49 a sample letter survives addressed to Jacob, one of these archimandrites, but only in a syriac translation from the acts of ephesus.50 it is almost the same as the Barsauma letter51 and does not add any background specific to the situation in edessa. Yet, although the letter to Jacob does not specify any limit to participation, it is clear that he and the others were intended to take part only in matters associated with the case of ibas, bishop of edessa.52 none of these edessene invitees was involved in the first session at ephesus, where Barsauma was the sole monk to attend and in due course to subscribe. only when the second session began, did the edessene archimandrites assemble outside, waving their imperial letters and asking for admittance.53 it is also notable that Theodosius did not choose a single archimandrite as their representative, but invited a host of them.

48. e.g., gaddis, There Is No Crime, 297–99. 49. for thoughts on monkish inclusion in councils at this period, see the introduction to this volume in which menze also discusses Barsauma’s subscriptions to the decisions at ephesus. 50. The syriac text from Bm add. 14530 (flemming, Akten, 13) translated at Perry, Second Synod, 39–40 (Coleman-norton, RSCC 2:no. 452); also translated by Doran, Stewards of the Poor, 136–37. 51. The opening address “Your Prudence” should be emended to “our Prudence” to match the equivalent self-reference to the emperors (“our Piety,” “our gentleness”) in the parallel Barsauma and Dioscorus letters. Palmer, “a Tale of Two synods,” 40 emended the Barsauma letter in the opposite way, but he has indicated to me that he now prefers my interpretation. 52. for the edessene events, which were extensively rehearsed at ephesus, see flemming, Akten, 13–55; Perry, Second Synod, 44–123; cf. Doran, Stewards, 139–75. 53. flemming, Akten, 12–15; Perry, Second Synod, 38–41; Doran, Stewards, 136–37.

Barsauma and the Emperors

37

many of the letters discussed above conclude with elements of the dating clauses, which enable us to reconstruct their chronological relationship to one another and to the Council of ephesus in general.54 The initial letter to Dioscorus summoning the council was issued from Constantinople on 30 march 449.55 Then the letter inviting Barsauma to the council was issued on 14 may from alexandrianae (an unknown location, but near heraclea-Perinthus in Thrace), with the consequent explanatory (and derivative) letter to Dioscorus (and presumably the equivalent to Juvenal) issued on 15 may at Therallum (Tzirallum, north of heraclea).56 also from alexandrianae on 14 may, there was issued a pair of matching letters to Counts helpidius and eulogius on the conduct of the council, and probably also an associated letter to Proclus, the proconsul of asia.57 finally, in response to official reports sent to Constantinople of the events at edessa in april,58 the letter to Jacob, together presumably with the parallel letters to the other edessene monks, all substantially repeating the text of the letter to Barsauma, was issued back at Constantinople on 13 June. This was less than two months before the council was due to start, on 1 august (in fact the first session only opened on the 8th), although the monks are not attested as participating until the second session, on 22 august. Theodosius was thus in Constantinople in late march, and again from mid-June onward, where he seems to have remained during the council, which he did not attend in person. While he was not as peripatetic as fourth-century emperors, it is notable that we find him issuing several letters while on the move in Thrace, although not far from Constantinople. The Life is largely unconcerned with chronology, so that it is not clear how long before the Council of ephesus the meeting between Theodosius and Barsauma took place. Was Barsauma actually traveling with the emperor when the official letter was sent to him, or, perhaps more likely, was he waiting back in Constantinople? or had he long since returned to euphratensis? Barsauma’s interactions with Theodosius in the Life suggest a great deal of traveling, probably within a very short period: thus, (1) from euphratensis to 54. for a summary chronology of the documents, see otto seeck, Regesten der Kaiser und Päpste (stuttgart: metzler, 1919), 381–83. 55. equivalent to the letters mentioned in the Life § 106.1. 56. richard J. a. Talbert, ed., Barrington Atlas of the Greek and Roman World (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000), map 52, B2; Theodor mommsen, Gesammelte Schriften, vol. 2, Juristische Schriften (Berlin: Weidmann, 1905), 2:274, 279–80; Timothy D. Barnes, The New Empire of Diocletian and Constantine (Cambridge, ma and london: harvard University Press, 1982), 52; lactantius, De mort. pers. 45.6 (seeck, Regesten, 161); Itin. ant. 230.7–8 (ed. otto Cuntz, Itineraria Romana I [stuttgart: Teubner, 1929], 33); Procopius, Bella 7.38.5. 57. The greek text of the letters to helpidius and Proclus, which should originally have been in latin, is preserved at Acts of Chalcedon i.49–50 (ACO ii.1, 72–73 and ii.3, 47–48; Price and gaddis, 1:137–39), with no date or place, but as 15 may at alexandrianae in the latin Collectio Novariensis 10.14 (ACO ii.2, 46). 58. millar, Greek Roman Empire, 257–58.

38

Simon Corcoran

Constantinople (the first meeting, early 449?); (2) from Constantinople (perhaps) to ephesus (for the council, summer 449; depending on the gap in time between the meeting and the planning for the council, it is possible that Barsauma had not returned home, and received his invitation while still in Constantinople); (3) from ephesus back home to euphratensis; (4) from euphratensis to Constantinople (second meeting); (5) from Constantinople to antioch by sea; and (6) from syria to Constantinople (third meeting). a final return home east to euphratensis is not specifically mentioned. all of this needs to be placed in a period of perhaps eighteen months before the death of Theodosius in the summer of 450. such a degree of mobility is certainly not logistically impossible. for instance, over a period of four months documents could be forwarded from edessa to Constantinople (mid-april 449), a letter could be sent back from Constantinople to edessa (mid-June 449), and then people travel from edessa to ephesus (late august 449). nonetheless, it may be thought that the number of Barsauma’s visits to the emperor and Constantinople has been multiplied. however, i do think that the letter to Barsauma confirms that he had met the emperor at least once, perhaps shortly before the summoning of the Council of ephesus, and that this visit was indeed crucial to the council’s background, with Theodosius summoning Barsauma individually to ephesus, as the sole monk included in the general assemblage of bishops. The Life and the letter to Barsauma together help to fix a moment in his travels. further, the author of the Life clearly knew that a letter about Barsauma was read out at ephesus, and probably knew the syriac translation of the text addressed to Dioscorus, although he chose not to quote it, but to adapt and expand it rather loosely. The surprising omission of the imperial letter to Barsauma suggests that this was missing from the syriac acts of ephesus as available to the author. it is clear, nonetheless, that Barsauma had come to the notice of Theodosius and gained his esteem, not simply from reports of his deeds in the east, but also through a personal meeting in advance of the council. m a r C ia n a n D P U l C h e r ia

Theodosius ii is the last emperor fully shared by the rival traditions that flowed from Chalcedon. There is no such ambiguity with regard to his successor marcian. The emperor who sponsored and then ratified the fourth of the ecumenical councils in the orthodox-Catholic tradition can be nothing other than wickedness incarnate, so that he is “the crooked serpent” (isaiah 27:1), damned to hell in the view of the anti-Chalcedonians.59 his portrayal in the Life, therefore, is uniformly 59. Thus, for the late fifth-century anti-Chalcedonian writer John rufus, marcian was possessed by the devil (Life of Peter the Iberian 81; horn and Phenix, John Rufus, 122–23), later struck dead by god (Life of Peter the Iberian 90 and On the Death of Theodosius 6; horn and Phenix, John Rufus, 134–35,

Barsauma and the Emperors

39

critical, his Christology nestorian (§ 114), and his death a divine judgment, despite his having inconveniently outlived Barsauma by almost a year. This necessitates an elaborate narrative to vindicate Barsauma, who only escapes arrest at the hands of the emperor’s men through dying, and then has to bring retribution by means of a posthumous curse-miracle (§§ 153 and 158–160). marcian undoubtedly serves as a foil to Theodosius, and the narrative in the Life sets up parallels to illustrate the contrast between them. Unlike Theodosius, marcian avoids meeting the holy Barsauma in person, being poisoned against him by those around him, and only ever communicates with him vicariously. Barsauma consents to accept a small gift from Theodosius, but refuses any gift from marcian (§§ 104.2–3, 124.1–5, 125.1–2). Where Theodosius immediately disbelieves and then exonerates Barsauma of the accusations against him (§§ 111–112), marcian readily listens and responds to such slanders (§§ 120.4, 121.2, 152.8). appropriately for the period, such accusations (whether true or false) often focus on abuses of power or corrupt living, rather than purely theological matters.60 Theodosius also involves Barsauma in the Council of ephesus, at which the latter plays the key role (§§ 106–107), while marcian is dissuaded from inviting him to participate at Chalcedon (§ 115), yet simultaneously recalling the heretic nestorius from exile (§ 114.5–6). again, Theodosius grants wide religious and secular authority to the orthodox Barsauma (§§ 105.4, 106.3–4, 108), while it is the “nestorian” Theodoret of Cyrrhus who is similarly honored by marcian (§ 151.1). Both the heretical ecclesiastics, nestorius and Theodoret, meet swift and grim ends long before Barsauma, struck fatally through their false-speaking mouths (§ 114.6, 151.1), imperial favor availing them not at all.61 finally, a sacra from Theodosius extolls Barsauma (§ 108), while a sacra from marcian condemns him (§ 152.8). marcian’s actions are portrayed as inversions of those of Theodosius. The negative view taken of marcian in the Life applies also to Pulcheria, who married him, after her brother Theodosius’s unexpected death, in order to legitimate his 290–91), and finally condemned to torment in hell (Plerophoriae 27, Po 8.1:68–69, translated at Watts, “Theodosius ii and his legacy,” 273). 60. nestorius, often thought to have died in egypt in the mid-450s, may indeed have died before fulfilling a summons to attend Chalcedon in 451 (george a. Bevan, The New Judas: The Case of Nestorius in Ecclesiastical Politics, 428–451 CE [louvain: Peeters, 2016], 323–30). The date of Theodoret’s death remains uncertain, and is sometimes assumed to be as late as the 460s, several years after that of Barsauma (istván Pásztori-Kupán, Theodoret of Cyrrhus [london: routledge, 2006], 26). for death by mouth in the non-Chalcedonian tradition, note also Pope agapetus (David Wilmshurst, Bar Hebraeus, The Ecclesiastical History: An English Translation [Piscataway, nJ: gorgias Press, 2016], 74). 61. e.g., ibas of edessa (Doran, Stewards, 118–32); Dioscorus of alexandria (accusation by disgruntled relatives of Cyril [Acts of Chalcedon iii.47–64 = ACO ii.1, 216–18 and ii.3, 294–97; Price and gaddis, 2:58–61]). see richard Price, “The Council of Chalcedon (451): a narrative,” in Chalcedon in Context: Church Councils, 400–700, ed. richard Price and mary Whitby (liverpool: liverpool University Press, 2009), 76–78, 83–87.

40

Simon Corcoran

position, but gaining in return his support for her religious objectives.62 although often simply coupled with marcian, she is also shown acting separately—for instance, as the enemy of Dioscorus, whom she confronts in person (§ 117). she spars only vicariously with Barsauma, who, of course, resists, rebukes, and suitably outlives her, while she dies swallowing her evil-speaking tongue (§ 128). it is significant, however, that, in contrast to eudocia, who is mentioned by name some dozen times in the section of the Life dealing with her sojourn in the holy land, Pulcheria is explicitly named only once (§ 117.3).63 otherwise she is unnamed, being associated with marcian and identified as his wife and empress. at her first mention she is called merely “the empress” or marcian’s “consort” (§ 115.1–2). There is no indication that her status, as an augusta, was in fact independent of and indeed long predated marcian’s elevation.64 it is possible that our author was not fully informed about imperial prosopography. Certainly one of the fictitious letters he quotes includes an inaccurate reference to an unnamed empress (§ 152.4), since it is placed after Pulcheria’s death, when there was no empress. marcian did not remarry or raise another to the rank of augusta.65 The anonymization, however, is probably quite deliberate. such is not unusual in hagiography or ecclesiastical histories,66 and elsewhere the Life anonymizes several (usually disfavored) persons, such as Juvenal and Theodoret.67 By portraying Pulcheria mainly as an anonymous adjunct of marcian, any relationship to her brother, Theodosius ii, is thereby occluded. making her such an active figure in the machinations over Chalcedon under marcian (which undoubtedly matches the truth of her role), while omitting her entirely from the stories about her brother’s reign, even as an oppositional figure, helps to demarcate the more sharply the rule of the good and orthodox Theodosius from that of the evil and heretic marcian. Whereas Barsauma’s itinerary under Theodosius seems somewhat too busy, his itinerary under marcian makes more sense, although with one glaring problem. The Life seems by default to leave Barsauma in Constantinople at the death of Theodosius, since there is no mention of a return east after the final visit (§ 112). There is no indication of where Barsauma is when marcian is dissuaded from 62. see, for instance, Kenneth g. holum, Theodosian Empresses: Women and Imperial Dominion in Late Antiquity, Transformation of the Classical heritage 3 (Berkeley, los angeles, and london: University of California Press, 1982), 214–16; Bevan, The New Judas, 310–20. 63. she is also mentioned in the heading to § 128, her “death” chapter, but that is less significant, if the headings are a later addition. 64. PLRE ii, Pulcheria, 929–30. she was made augusta in 414. 65. marcian’s daughter only became augusta when her husband became emperor in 467 (PLRE ii, euphemia 6, 423–24). The next augusta after Pulcheria was leo i’s wife, aelia Verina, following the death of marcian (PLRE ii, Verina, 1156). 66. e.g., eusebius as discussed by ronald T. ridley, “anonymity in the Vita Constantini,” Byzantion 50 (1980): 241–58. 67. Thus the unnamed bishop of Jerusalem at ephesus ii is the turncoat Juvenal (§ 107.2), while the unnamed bishop of Cyrrhus (§ 151.1) is Theodoret, condemned at ephesus, restored at Chalcedon.

Barsauma and the Emperors

41

summoning him to participate in Chalcedon and to visit the imperial couple (§§ 114.6–115.3), nor of where Barsauma preaches against the heretical outcome of Chalcedon (§ 119.4). his location becomes clear only with his arrest at Tenedos, if correctly identified (§ 122.1), apparently while on his way to rome to gain the surprising help of Valentinian iii (§§ 120.3, 121.2; see the next section below). it is not explicitly stated, however, whence Barsauma has come, since the Life has stressed Barsauma’s exclusion from Chalcedon and makes no suggestion that he turned up there uninvited, even if tacitly it might be inferred that Barsauma had stayed in Constantinople ever since Theodosius’s death. We do know in fact that Barsauma was present at Chalcedon, certainly at the fourth session on 17 october 451,68 during which the monks had imperial permission to present a petition. This was one of the most dramatic moments in the council, when Barsauma was loudly and explicitly blamed for the death of flavian of Constantinople two years before. The historical circumstances make sense, therefore, if Barsauma was leaving Constantinople to return home east and avoid subscribing to any unpalatable decisions of Chalcedon,69 and was then intercepted at Tenedos, just off the coast of the Troad below the Dardanelles, and not far from abydos, the key southern control point for the straits.70 although Canon 23 of Chalcedon allowed for the expulsion of troublesome monks from Constantinople to their homelands,71 marcian’s aim was clearly to detain and coerce Barsauma first to accept Chalcedon. how did the author of the Life come to place Barsauma in the correct location? By craft or coincidence? how good was his information? The reference to the count of the straits (komēs tōn stenōn; §§ 121.1, 122.1), who was tasked with arresting Barsauma, may suggest good early information, since the abydos tariff edict has been redated to the reign of anastasius, enabling this office to be retrojected at least to the 470s,72 although a Justinianic date is elsewhere strongly championed.73 or is this imaginative reuse from a later syriac source, which would have to be a derivative of John malalas (the only other author to mention the count), the history of whose text and its recycling is obscure, but might furnish a later sixth-century context?74 it 68. Acts of Chalcedon iV.66, 77–81, 95 (ACO ii.1, 311, 312, 314 and ii.3, 379, 381, 384; Price and gaddis, 2:154, 156, 159). 69. Barsauma confesses only the faith of the 318 fathers, i.e., nicaea (Acts of Chalcedon iV.95; ACO ii.1, 314 and ii.3, 384; Price and gaddis, 2:159). 70. Procopius, Anecd. 25.2–3. 71. Acts of Chalcedon, Canon 23 (ACO ii.1, 358 and ii.3, 536–37; Price and gaddis, 3:101). 72. OGIS no. 521; SEG XXXiV.1243. for the late fifth-century chronology, see fiona haarer, Anastasius I: Politics and Empire in the Late Roman World (Cambridge: francis Cairns, 2006), 217–20. This is the preferred date in menze’s introduction to this volume. 73. Best argued by Constantine Zuckerman, Du village à l’empire: Autour du registre fiscal d’Aphroditô (Paris: association des amis du centre d’histoire et civilisation de Byzance, 2004), 93–96. 74. John malalas, Chron. XViii.14 (ed. Thurn, 361). muriel Debié, L’écriture de l’histoire en syriaque (leuven: Peeters, 2015), 336–37, 440–41, 530–32, 536–37, discussing malalas, John of ephesus, and Ps.-Zacharias.

42

Simon Corcoran

is not clear why, if untrue, the story of the arrest of Barsauma at Tenedos by the count would have been invented. nor does there seem any biblical or other model this might have been seeking to imitate, in the way that Joseph and Pharoah’s ring worked earlier to burnish Barsauma’s status. Possibly our text is layered. at § 123.12 Barsauma states that marcian had (at some earlier point) not dared to sit in his presence, but this episode is never described, unless § 123.1 can be read to suggest that this whole chapter takes place before the emperor. Could this be a reference to an imagined confrontation between marcian and Barsauma at Chalcedon, which was otherwise removed from the text to conceal any involvement of the monk? however, the early syriac sources, so rich for ephesus ii, are generally poor for despised Chalcedon, and, as we have seen, our author does seem to have knowledge gaps—for instance, regarding the letter to Barsauma. overall, the arrest at Tenedos and the count of the straits provide the most baffling episode in seeking the context for understanding the author of the Life and his work. after the conundrum of the arrest, the logistics of the remaining account make sense both dramatically and historically without particular complication: his lengthy detention in Constantinople in 452 (§§ 122.6–127.1); his sojourn under guard during the winter of 452/3 in nicomedia (§§ 127.2–128.4); his authorized return home to euphratensis in the spring or summer, reaching there about the time of Pulcheria’s death in July 453 (§§ 128.5–129.1).75 Whether or not true in detail, this itinerary looks realistic, far more so than the swift succession of visits to Theodosius at Constantinople in 449 and 450. While Barsauma’s detention in Constantinople in 452 at the behest of marcian is quite plausible, is this true also of his encounters with a series of anonymous but titled officials? Their anonymity is not in itself a problem, since such is common in texts of this type, but the details of these officials are not all that they seem.76 first comes the encounter with the emperor’s magistros (§ 123), who ends up dead for attempting to sit in judgment upon Barsauma. next there comes the megistos huparchos (§ 124), the “greatest” prefect, who is sent by marcian to persuade Barsauma to take some imperial treasure and return home without cursing the imperial couple. When this fails, the emperor asks him to go again, but the prefect refuses. The prefect is portrayed as god-fearing and sympathetic to Barsauma. finally, there is the patrikios (patrician) or “father of the emperors” (§ 125). 75. PLRE ii, Pulcheria, 930. 76. for the high administration in the mid-fifth century, see a. h. m. Jones, The Later Roman Empire, 284–602 (oxford: oxford University Press, 1964), esp. 1:333–73, 563–92; millar, Greek Roman Empire, ch. 6; hugh elton, “imperial Politics at the Court of Theodosius ii,” in The Power of Religion in Late Antiquity, ed. andrew Cain and noel lenski (farnham: ashgate, 2009), 133–42; Jill harries, “men without Women: Theodosius’ Consistory and the Business of government,” in Theodosius II: Rethinking the Roman Empire in Late Antiquity, ed. Christopher Kelly (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 67–89.

Barsauma and the Emperors

43

in this brief section, the patrician, who is described as a friend of Barsauma, visits him with a message similar to that of the prefect in the previous section, imploring him to take the treasure and leave the city, or, failing that, simply to leave the city. This last request Barsauma finally accepts (§ 126.1). The first of these officials should bear the latin title magister (which must lie behind the syriac rendering), and is most likely the magister officiorum (master of offices), the highest civilian minister after the praetorian prefects, with varied judicial and administrative functions and often involved in the managing of church councils.77 The magister officiorum in post at the time of Barsauma’s detention was Vincomalus. The megistos huparchos is probably intended to be the praetorian prefect, the highest civil post after the emperor, and can only be Palladius, praetorian prefect of the east from 450 to 455 (PLRE ii, Palladius 9). Both these were among the most senior secular notables present at Chalcedon, and were recipients of the imperial decrees issued after it.78 Palladius, therefore, hardly seems a ready ally of Barsauma, while Vincomalus, although likely to have been suitably hostile, far from dying as in the Life, flourished to become consul in 453, and was still alive in the 460s. it is notable that in an earlier episode (§ 109), a pagan general (stratelates = magister militum [master of soldiers]) at antioch dies as a result of a fall from his horse, while plotting against Barsauma and Theodosius ii.79 Yet this man can only be Zeno the isaurian, who survived the reign of Theodosius to become a patrician,80 while it was rather Theodosius himself who died from equestrian mishap.81 The swift deaths of Barsauma’s enemies after his irreversible curses are a repeated trope throughout the Life, part of Barsauma’s “merciless attitude” (so Volker menze, in the introduction to this volume). Therefore, it is salutary to note cases of undoubted survival of the probable real individuals behind the some of the “signs” or miracles. assigning a plausible identity to the patrikios or “father of the emperors” may seem easier, since neither term denotes an office, and several persons were of the 77. manfred Clauss, Der Magister Officiorum in der Spätantike (4.-6. Jahrhundert): Das Amt und sein Einfluß auf die kaiserliche Politik (munich: C.h. Beck, 1981), 76–80, 82–98. 78. PLRE ii, Vincomalus, 1169–70; PLRE ii, Palladius 9. at Chalcedon: roland Delmaire, “les dignitaires laics au Concile de Chalcédoine: notes sur la hiérarchie et les préséances au milieu du Ve siècle,” Byzantion 54 (1984): 141–75. letters: ACO ii.1, 478–83; ii.2, 115–16; and ii.3, 348–52; Price and gaddis, 3:130–36. 79. There is a similar garbled story in Damascius (ca. 520): Photius, Bibliotheca, Cod. 242.290 (ed. henry, 6:53); Polymnia athanassiadi, Damascius: The Philosophical History (athens: apamea Cultural association, 1999), ch. 115a (f303), 276–77. 80. PLRE ii, Zenon 6, 1199–1200; consul 448, magister militum 447–451, patricius 451. see honigmann, Le couvent de Barsauma, 20; raban von haeling, “Damascius und die heidnische opposition im 5. Jahrhundert nach Christus,” Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum 23 (1980): 87–88. 81. e.g., John malalas, Chron. XiV.27 (ed. Thurn, 288).

44

Simon Corcoran

appropriate dignity in 451–452, most also present at Chalcedon.82 The best fit for a person who might have earlier been a friend of Barsauma, and yet was still sufficiently in favor with marcian, would be nomus, the former magister officiorum,83 onetime ally of Chrysaphius and Dioscorus,84 but also an attendee at Chalcedon, which showed that he had successfully weathered the change of regime. But the greater choice of candidates makes a plausible guess much the easier, and that still leaves the discrepancies over the magister and huparchos. Can we be certain that there is a historical patricius requiring identification in this chapter? so, how should we regard the account of Barsauma’s encounters with these officials in Constantinople? That Barsauma was indeed detained, interviewed, and pressurized by officials at the emperor’s behest in the aftermath of Chalcedon is plausible and need not be untrue. he might even have met Vincomalus or Palladius or other notables mentioned above. how much genuine information the author of the Life had about these events is another matter. rather, the sequence of events in the Life appears to be more dramatic construction than anything else. in martyr acts, confrontation with judges is standard, including those situations where the persecutors also are Christian, if of a dangerously heretical type.85 standard in the lives of saints are interactions with persons of rank, who often need to be won over.86 The encounters in the Life have the flavor of both genres. But they are also nicely crafted. it can be argued that each of the officials is higher in rank (in the view of the author) than the last, progressing from magistros to praetorian prefect and finally to patrician. further, the attitude of each to Barsauma also changes between encounters, progressing from hostility and fear to increasing sympathy and favor. not only does each visitor fail to achieve the emperor’s wishes, but each has a decreasing desire to do so. The more the emperor perseveres, the more the balance of power between emperor and monk goes into reverse. Barsauma cannot be forced to accommodate himself to the imperial will, or even to leave the city, other than at the time and in the manner of his own choosing. if the sequence of officials is more literary construction than historical fact, where did the author find suitable detail? here the key, i think, is provided by the 82. see ralph W. mathisen, “emperors, Consuls, and Patricians: some Problems of Personal Preference, Precedence, and Protocol,” Byzantinische Forschungen 17 (1991): 189; millar, Greek Roman Empire, 198–99. 83. PLRE ii, nomus 1, 785–86; Clauss, Magister Officiorum, 173. 84. Acts of Chalcedon iii.57 (ACO ii.1, 216–18 and ii.3, 294–97; Price and gaddis, 2:58–61). he was also acclaimed (as nomios) at edessa (flemming, Akten, 17, 25; Perry, Second Synod, 49, 67). 85. for adaptation to Christian-on-Christian persecution, see marina Detoraki, “greek Passions of the martyrs in Byzantium,” in The Ashgate Research Companion to Byzantine Hagiography, ed. stephanos efthymiadis (london: ashgate, 2014), 85–89. 86. for confrontations with notables, see antony Kaldellis, “The hagiography of Doubt and scepticism,” in The Ashgate Research Companion to Byzantine Hagiography, 2:459–61.

Barsauma and the Emperors

45

reports of events at edessa in april 449 as recounted in the surviving syriac translation of the acts of the second session of ephesus ii.87 a series of acclamations by a miaphysite crowd at edessa praises and beseeches the emperors, high officials and local notables, as well as condemning the iniquities of ibas and his coterie. although no doubt prepared in advance and orchestrated in various ways, rather than being spontaneous, the acclamations do show how the names and titles of numerous high-ranking officials were generally known in one of the most easterly communities in the empire.88 aside from the two emperors (Theodosius ii and Valentinian iii), some half-a-dozen persons of high rank are invoked, including prefects and patricians, with demands also for the emperors, the prefects, the magister (officiorum), and the senate to be informed of the matter.89 note, for instance, a very clear parallel to the association in the Life of patrician and “father of the emperors” to be found within the acclamations: To anatolius many years! To the patrikios many years! You are the father of the augusti! You are the confidant of our lords! above all the one anatolius! The Trinity with the patrikios! 90

The details need not suggest, of course, that all those chanting understood the niceties of Constantinopolitan or wider imperial politics, or were aware of the exact confessional allegiances of everyone involved. anatolius, for instance, was a long-term ally of Theodoret (deposed, like ibas, at ephesus ii) and in due course the most senior lay participant at Chalcedon.91 a later reader, however, could well interpret the names as denoting genuine opponents of ibas and the “nestorianism” that triumphed at Chalcedon. further, when we come to consider what real detail of events and people in Chalcedon and Constantinople in 451–452 the author of the Life would have been able to access, the parallel details from edessa are highly suggestive. if the author relied principally upon material in syriac, he may have been able to use some version of the detailed acts of ephesus ii (including the reports from edessa), but not any equivalent for Chalcedon. as already noted, this might account for his awareness of a letter about Barsauma to the Council of 87. for the edessa material, see flemming, Akten, 14–55; Perry, Second Synod, 44–123; Doran, Stewards, 139–75. 88. The acclamations are well analyzed and clearly set out by hans-Ulrich Wiemer, “akklamationen im spätrömischen reich: Zur Typologie und funktion eines Kommunikationsrituals,” Archiv für Kulturgeschichte 86 (2004): 35–44 and 66–73. 89. There was a report from the praeses to the master of offices: flemming, Akten, 23 and 33; Perry, Second Synod, 74 and 84; Clauss, Magister Officiorum, 170; cf. crowd’s demands at flemming, Akten, 19; Perry, Second Synod, 52. 90. flemming, Akten, 17; Perry, Second Synod, 46. 91. PLRE ii, anatolius 10, 84–86; Delmaire, “les dignitaires,” 161–62; schor, Theodoret’s People, 48–52, 124–25.

46

Simon Corcoran

ephesus (present in syriac texts), but not the letter addressed to Barsauma himself, only known through the Chalcedonian tradition. similarly, the acts of ephesus could have been plundered for details about offices and ranks suitable for persons in Constantinople, together with the additional implication drawn from the acclamations that the anti-Chalcedonian view must have had high-ranking secular supporters in the imperial capital. for this reason, i do not think that it is at all surprising that the sequence of officials that Barsauma encounters in Constantinople cannot be matched easily to known persons and offices of the time, but rather that it reflects the sort of knowledge derivable from the ephesian acts, recycled to good effect. The surviving manuscript of the syriac acts of the second session of ephesus ii (Bm add. ms 14530) dates to 535, that for the first session to 562 (Bm add. ms 12156).92 how much earlier the acts in whole or part were first translated into syriac is hard to say—perhaps by the later fifth century.93 Whatever the case, the author of the Life, at least, would seem to have been more reliant upon such written sources in constructing his portrait of Barsauma than on any direct knowledge that he may have had of Barsauma’s experiences in Constantinople. Va l e n T i n ia n i i i

one final imperial figure is mentioned, if less prominently, although with interesting implications. it is twice suggested that Barsauma is on his way to the Western emperor, Valentinian iii, who will come east to wreak revenge upon marcian and undo his improper religious policy (§§ 120.3, 121.2–3).94 Valentinian was first cousin to Theodosius ii, as well as son-in-law, and so a possible heir. When Theodosius died unexpectedly, Valentinian was initially irritated that the unrelated marcian should have been acclaimed augustus and married to the acquiescent Pulcheria without reference to himself, as the senior surviving emperor and a close relative.95

92. for Bm add. 12156, see the description by John Behr, The Case against Diodore and Theodore (oxford: oxford University Press, 2011), 161–66. 93. for the materials available in syriac by the early sixth century, and even before, see fergus millar, “The syriac acts of the second Council of ephesus (449),” in Price and Whitby, Chalcedon in Context, 45–69 (repr. in Empire, Church, and Society in the Late Roman Near East [leuven: Peeters, 2015], 529–52); and millar, Religion, Language, and Community in the Roman Near East: Constantine to Mohammed (oxford: oxford University Press, 2013), 121–38. 94. note that the anti-Chalcedonian bishop mari from arabia is said to have fled to rome, where he died (§ 118.5). 95. for marcian’s accession, see holum, Theodosian Empresses, 208–9; allen D. lee, “The eastern empire: Theodosius to anastasius,” in The Late Empire, A.D. 337–425, ed. averil Cameron and Peter garnsey, Cambridge ancient history Xiii, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 42–43; Bevan, The New Judas, 311–15.

Barsauma and the Emperors

47

he did not recognize marcian formally until march 452.96 The fact that Valentinian was withholding formal recognition from marcian throughout the crucial year of Chalcedon (451) is unlikely to have been easily appreciated by all but the most politically alert or well-connected in the east, especially as texts issued by marcian included Valentinian’s name.97 only slight echoes of Valentinian’s discontent are found in later eastern historical writings, deriving from Priscus, who certainly was close to the court of marcian.98 Therefore Valentinian should have been most readily known in the east precisely among those who read the texts of imperial laws connected with church matters. The letters of Theodosius ii in regard to ephesus ii were headed by his and Valentinian’s names (in that order),99 while in those of marcian before, during, and after Chalcedon there appeared the names of Valentinian and marcian (in that order), Valentinian being now the senior emperor in the imperial college and always recognized by marcian as such, irrespective of their political relationship.100 additionally, petitions are recorded as addressed to emperors jointly.101 acclamations encompassed each member of the college.102 oaths were sworn in their joint names.103 Public monuments or buildings would also name or

96. Prosper, Chron. Additamenta, s.a. 452 (ed. mommsen, mgh aa iX, 490); cf. Val. iii, Novv. 36 (June 452) and 2.4 (oct. 454). marcian’s consulship in 451 was ignored (roger s. Bagnall et al., Consuls of the Later Roman Empire [atlanta: scholars Press, 1987], 436–27). see also mark humphries, “Valentinian iii and the City of rome,” in Two Romes: Rome and Constantinople in Late Antiquity, ed. lucy grigg and gavin Kelly (oxford: oxford University Press, 2012), 173. 97. marcian had included Valentinian in headings to documents immediately, even when writing to correspondents in italy: leo, Ep. 73 (Pl 54:899–900; ACO ii.3.1, 17, Ep. ante gesta 27; ACO ii.1.1, 8, Ep. Coll. M 10); marc. Nov. 1 (oct. 450). 98. Priscus, fr. 30 (Blockley, p. 328) = John of antioch, fr. 224 (at mariev, Iohannis Antiocheni fragmenta, 406) = fr. 293 (at Umberto, Iohannis Antiocheni fragmenta, 494). Valentinian’s opposition is very muted at evag., Hist. eccl. ii.1 (Whitby, Ecclesiastical History, 60). an echo does reach later syriac sources, as eventually reflected in michael the syrian, Chronique 8.[10].2 (ed. Chabot, 2:38; tr. moosa, 224). for Priscus, see PLRE ii, Priscus 1, 906; and Dariusz Brodka, “Priskos von Panion und Kaiser marcian,” Millennium-Jahrbuch 9 (2012): 145–62. 99. e.g., Dioscorus’s invitation to ephesus (Acts of Chalcedon i.24, 81 [ACO ii.1, 68, 82; Price and gaddis, 1:132, 147]; cf. flemming, Akten, 3; Perry, Second Synod, 3). 100. e.g., the letters transferring the council from nicaea to Chalcedon in september 451 (ACO ii.1, 28, 30 and ii.3, 22; Price and gaddis, 1:108–9). 101. e.g., to Valentinian and marcian from eusebius of Dorylaeum (Acts of Chalcedon i.16 [ACO ii.1, 66 and ii.3, 41; Price and gaddis, 1:131]); from Bishop Bassianus (Acts of Chalcedon Xi.7 [ACO ii.1, 404 and ii.3, 492; Price and gaddis, 3:6); from eunomius of nicomedia (Acts of Chalcedon Xiii.5 [ACO ii.3, 504; Price and gaddis, 3:26]). 102. Thus for both Theodosius and Valentinian at edessa in 449 (flemming, Akten, 15, 17, 25; Perry, Second Synod, 45–46, 48–49, 67 = Doran, Stewards, 139, 141, 148–49). 103. Acts of Chalcedon i.922–42, reporting oaths sworn in the names of Theodosius and Valentinian (ACO ii.3, 215–21; Price and gaddis, 1:316–23). for the papyri, note roger s. Bagnall and K. a. Worp, Chronological Systems of Byzantine Egypt, 2nd ed. (leiden and Boston: Brill, 2004), 280–81.

48

Simon Corcoran

depict corulers.104 There were statues of Valentinian in Constantinople, although outside the capital cities imperial statues had become rarities by the mid-fifth century.105 Valentinian also appeared on some coinage from eastern mints under Theodosius ii and marcian, even if he did not reciprocate.106 additionally, his consulates were acknowledged in documents and dating formulas.107 While the attachment of Valentinian’s name to imperial letters issued in the east cannot be read as evidence of his theological views, no doubt contemporaries, and later persons as well, could choose to read into such things whatever they wanted. after all, Valentinian’s name was presumably included in the headings to Theodosius’s documents endorsing and enforcing ephesus ii, and, although lacking in the incomplete texts that survive,108 a reference to Theodosius and Valentinian reigning jointly does appear at the end of the syriac acts of ephesus.109 in reality Valentinian, with his mother and his wife, strongly supported Pope leo i in his dissatisfaction with the decisions taken at ephesus and the ignoring of his Tome, and they exchanged an extraordinary set of letters with Theodosius and Pulcheria urging a change of policy.110 no one involved with Barsauma and the ecclesiastical politics in and around Constantinople in the early 450s can have had any illusion about the basic attitude of the Western court and that it was in Christological terms essentially pro-Chalcedonian. Yet, perhaps a monk writing in syria somewhat later might have been able to attribute an unwarranted role to Valentinian iii as a foil to marcian, if only from noting his name attached to documents relating to ephesus ii, especially if he was primarily dependent upon texts in syriac, as i have earlier argued. it is notable that the two imperial letters quoted ver104. John malalas, Chron. XiV.13 (ed. Thurn, 280–81; tr. Jeffreys et al., 196–97); Downey, A History of Antioch, 454. milestones: David french, Roman Roads and Milestones of Asia Minor, Biaa electronic monograph 5 ([london]: British institute at ankara, 2014), vol. 3.5, nos. 52B, 95a, 142B-C, 152. 105. The evidence is from a late literary source: averil Cameron and Judith herrin, Constantinople in the Early Eighth Century: The “Parastaseis syntomoi chronikai” (leiden: Brill, 1984), chs. 51, 71, 75, and 87 = Last Statues of Antiquity database [http://laststatues.classics.ox.ac.uk/] nos. 48, 2735, 36, 470; Ulrich gehn and Bryan Ward-Perkins, “Constantinople,” in The Last Statues of Antiquity, ed. r. r. r. smith and Bryan Ward-Perkins (oxford: oxford University Press, 2016), 143–44; r. r. r. smith, “statue Practice in the late roman empire: numbers, Costumes, and style,” in smith and Ward-Perkins, The Last Statues, 8–9, figs. 1.6–7. 106. RIC X, 258, 261–65, 269, 274–76, 278–80. 107. Bagnall, Consuls, 425–55; Bagnall and Worp, Chronological Systems, 195–98. 108. letters to Dioscorus and Juvenal (ACO ii.3, 347–48; flemming, Akten, 150–55; Perry, Second Synod, 364–70; Coleman-norton, RSCC 2:nos. 459–60). 109. flemming, Akten, 157; Perry, Second Synod, 376. 110. The Western letters with Theodosius’s dismissive replies are in leo, Epp. 55–58, 62–64 (Pl 54:857–66, 875–80; ACO ii.3.1, 13–17, Epp. ante gesta 18–24; greek versions at ACO ii.1.1, 5–8, 49–50, Epp. Coll. M 2–7 and H 14; listings in Price and gaddis, 3:160–61, 169, 177–78). see also holum, Theodosian Empresses, 204–5; millar, Greek Roman Empire, 36–38.

Barsauma and the Emperors

49

batim in the Life, although largely inauthentic, are headed by the joint names of Theodosius and Valentinian (§§ 106.2, 108.2). C o n C lU sio n

The overall conclusion to be drawn from the material examined in the three sections above is that there is some verisimilitude in the Life’s depiction of the late roman empire in the broadest sense—for instance, in the importance of correspondence or acknowledgments of imperial collegiality. however, the author has very uneven information that seldom provides detailed or accurate firsthand knowledge of Barsauma’s dealings with the emperors or his time spent in Constantinople. When he gives sufficient details for his account to be checked, he is often found wanting. This does not negate all his narrative, but cautions that, even when layered with apparently knowledgeable technicalities, the events described are best accepted only with independent verification. Thus at least one visit of Barsauma to Theodosius ii is indeed supported by a careful reading of the emperor’s letter of invitation for the council at ephesus. from the author’s perspective, however, provided that Barsauma is shown to be a hero of orthodoxy, the historical detail, even if known, is of small concern. Biblical exempla or the narratalogical tropes of hagiography overwhelm any source material. The roman emperor is more Pharaoh or Josiah.111 indeed, i consider that the author was heavily reliant on whatever written material was available in syriac, of the sort we find in surviving sixth-century manuscripts relating to the Council of ephesus. This can then explain, on the one hand, the presence in the Life of such things as highly technical details of titulature and the strong echoes of Theodosius’s letter to the bishops at ephesus and, on the other, the omission of both the letter to Barsauma himself and his intervention at Chalcedon. given that we do not know how quickly syriac translations were produced and circulated, while a later sixth-century date for the composition of the imperial episodes provides the easier explanation of their content, a later fifth-century date cannot be excluded.

111. Cassiodorus, Variae 6.3.1; Claudia rapp, “The old Testament models for emperors in early Byzantium,” in The Old Testament in Byzantium, ed. Paolo magdalino and robert s. nelson (Washington, DC: Dumbarton oaks, 2010), 175–98.

2

ascetic history and rhetoric in the Life of Barsauma Cornelia B. horn

The new critical edition and translation of the Life of Barsauma prompt one to examine more closely some key features of Barsauma’s ascetic profile in his biography against the background of selected ancient spiritual and ascetic writings as well as historical documents in syriac and greek. This discussion concentrates on Barsauma and his ascetic election and formation as a child, on his presentation as a syrian mourner with an analysis of the characteristic features of that type of asceticism, and on Barsauma as a practitioner of the discipline of fasting. This examination shows how the Life delivers a portrait of its hero that fits in exceptionally well with what its ancient readers would have expected of an exemplary monk. even the characterization of some of the violent features of Barsauma’s endeavors can be understood, at least in part, as expressions of a more radical ascetic syrian spirituality. Ba r s aUm a’ s a s C e T iC P r o f i l e i n T h e L I F E OF BA R S AUM A

Barsauma’s biographer recounts the life of a syrian ascetic. The hero was, first and foremost, an outstanding representative of those intriguing holy men and women i am grateful for the support this work received through a fellowship from the alexander von humboldt foundation, a heisenberg fellowship (gZ ho 5221/1–1), and the heisenberg Professorship of languages and Cultures of the Christian orient (gZ ho 5221/2–1) at the martin-luther-University halle-Wittenberg, sponsored by the Deutsche forschungsgemeinschaft. for a fuller discussion of the present topic, see Cornelia horn, “rhetoric and history in fifth-Century Characterizations of ascetics: Portraying the fifth-Century syrian Wandering monk Barsauma,” in Crossing Boundaries: Oriental Christian Cultures and Ideas in Motion, ed. Cornelia horn et al., eastern mediterranean Texts and Contexts (Warwick, ri: abelian academics, in press).

50

Ascetic History and Rhetoric in the Life of Barsauma

51

who populated the syrian landscape in late antiquity.1 among them, Barsauma distinguished himself through his practices of mourning and fasting. The relevance of asceticism for Barsauma’s profile comes sharply into focus in the headline and the concluding comments to the text. The title may represent the work of the original author, a later redactor, or a scribe. Yet it introduces Barsauma as the “chosen one” (gaβyā), the “chief of the ascetics,” or better the “chief of the mourners” (rīšā ðaβīlē), and as a “holy one” (qaddīšā) and a “god-clad (lәβīš lallāhā) man” (§ 1). The concluding sentence again presents him as the “chosen one” (gaβyā), then, in a slight variant of the expression of the title, as the “master of the mourners” (rabbā ðaβīlē), and once more as a “holy (qaddīšā) and god-clad (lәβīš lallāhā) man” (v. Bars. subscription in l1). This terminology, which provides the characterizing framework for the Life, emphasizes that Barsauma’s whole life was that of an ascetic, and highlights Barsauma’s authority. “god-clad,” which represents the greek θεοφόρος, theophoros, recalls for the reader the characterization of significant martyrs—for instance, ignatius of antioch, who was thought to have possessed the authority of an apostle, including the right to admonish and correct. severus of antioch, for instance, presented in a sermon “ignatius [of antioch], in whom Christ dwelt and spoke even as Paul, and from this he was named the godclad one.”2 in the Life of Barsauma, the hero is both the seemingly passive mourner and the active authority, combining both roles: he is a monk with the authority of a bishop (as apostolic successor). Ba r s aUm a T h e a s C e T iC , C ho se n f r om C h i l D ho o D

The first part of the Life concerns Barsauma’s selection and early formation as ascetic. The initial twelve paragraphs narrate his life up to his breakthrough as a public figure, presenting the process, in the course of which he was singled out, gained initial approval, and began to achieve public recognition. The Life features prominently the connected ideas of the young ascetic gaining early on a powerful sense of calling, an understanding of his election by god, and an awareness of his ascetic destiny. The headline employed the passive participle gaβyā as the first attribute with which it described Barsauma. This word refers to what is chosen, elected, approved, but also to that which is, or has become, pure and eminent.3 The terminology of 1. Peter Brown, “The rise and function of the holy man in late antiquity,” Journal of Roman Studies 61 (1971): 80–101 (repr. in Brown, Society and the Holy in Late Antiquity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982), 103–52. 2. see Bl add. 12159. 3. Payne smith and Payne smith, A Compendious Syriac Dictionary, 58.

52

Cornelia B. Horn

being “chosen” occurs most frequently in the early part of the text. The prophetic vision of the desert-dweller Joseph, in response to which he announced Barsauma as a man of righteousness and as one who surpassed John the Baptist, marks the beginning of Barsauma’s “chosen status” (gaβyūθā) (§ 2.1). This state of election went hand in hand with the idea that young Barsauma was destined to overcome all hardships and would be victorious against all difficulties. Thus, the Life speaks of “the chosen status of the victorious Barsauma” (gaβyūθēh dәnas. s. s. īh. ā βars. awmā) (§ 2.1). Those who witnessed the young child Barsauma surviving an attack by ferocious dogs reportedly declared aloud that this rescue was a sign “of the chosen and victorious status of the child (gaβyūθēh wәzāxūθēh dәyallōðā), who was destined to win all [his] contests (nezke βxolhon agōnē) and to be delivered from all harm” (§ 3.5). Barsauma’s chosen status even became the subject of a quasiprophetic announcement on the part of one of the child’s rescuers, who proclaimed that “this child [was] the chosen instrument of god” (hānā yallōðā maɁnā hū gaβyā ðallāhā) and “ha[d] something great about him,” as a result of which “he [was to] be in the presence of god” (nehwe qðām allāhā) (§ 3.6). To those familiar with the imagery of leviticus this announcement could have suggested the selection of a future priest for service in god’s temple. Yet any anticipations of Barsauma leading the life of an ascetic and spending his time standing in prayer also would have been well served by such terminology. The syriac gaβyā captures in a nutshell the discussion of how Barsauma had embarked upon asceticism and was guided along this path from his earliest childhood on. The space the Life devotes to profiling Barsauma as a child-ascetic is considerable, especially when one compares this material to relevant accounts in greek hagiographies. if one studies, for example, the childhood endeavors of antony or simeon the stylite, it becomes obvious that syriac accounts of ascetics, particularly in the Life of Simeon the Stylite and the Life of Barsauma, offer lengthier and more detailed narratives of their heroes’ childhoods as appropriate foreshadowing of the children’s later ascetic careers. in a comparative perspective, the Life of Barsauma is unique for the significantly greater independence with which Barsauma as a child is shown to have determined his own ascetic destiny. in the syriac tradition, the extensive literary development of the topos of the child-ascetic far outstripped the originally modest requirements of ancient biography adapted to Christian propaganda in the egyptian context.4 The Life of Antony’s attention to antony’s early ascetic endeavors seems unimpressive when read beside the supernatural prowess of youths in syriac ascetic biography, and among these the Life of Barsauma holds superlative rank. one reads dramatic details 4. for a more detailed study of this material with references to editions, see Cornelia B. horn and John W. martens, “Let the Little Children Come to Me”: Childhood and Children in Early Christianity (Washington, DC: Catholic University of america Press, 2009), 323–27.

Ascetic History and Rhetoric in the Life of Barsauma

53

concerning the child’s fasting, and about his having been abandoned by his parents, yet having been taken up under the lord’s wing. This child was said to have been “innocent in his nature, simple in his speech and unschooled in the lore of human letters” (§ 10.4). it would not be a surprise to anyone that a young child might still be ignorant. Yet the encomiast went further than simply rejecting the worldly learning found in earlier portraits of young ascetics in order to display the triumphant superiority of ascetic discipline when he declared that in the case of Barsauma “fasting was his tutor” (s. awmā hwā lēh mәrabbәyānā) (§ 10.4). This made him “wise in the lord” (§ 10.4), which could refer to Proverbs 9:10a (“The fear of the lord is the beginning of wisdom”). such a comment also points to a spiritual attitude of showing respect toward god, and one might see the “fear of the lord” as a replacement for a “fear of one’s father” in a customary family setting as the source of Barsauma’s wisdom. Barsauma is said to have fled to the life of the desert, having been separated from his biological family at a very young age, and was practicing fasting already “from his early youth” (men t. alyūθēh) (§ 10.4). Visits in the company of his grandmother introduced the young child Theodoret to the wonders of the ascetic life as practiced in the regions of the holy mountain near antioch. in that case, encountering asceticism did not lead to strict imitation. Yet it contributed to shaping the mind-set of the later bishop of Cyrrhus. it also brought about acquaintance with ascetic ideas, which eventually Theodoret promoted prominently in his Religious History. here, in the syrian realm, with its opportunities for encountering the more extreme forms of ascetic life, in particular that of the stylites, syriac and syro-greek hagio-biography developed fuller accounts of the extraordinary achievements of ascetics already during their childhood. even a cursory reading of the different versions of the Life of Simeon the Stylite, composed by different authors, or the Life of Simeon the Stylite the Younger readily suggests that the author of the Life of Barsauma developed the text’s depiction of Barsauma’s childhood in conversation with that line of ascetic biographical writing. The theme of being chosen, which characterizes the early portion of the Life of Barsauma, is one of the significant motifs in which the two sets of texts differ. for the child-ascetic Barsauma, the decisive moment that determined the course of his future career came with his return to and weeping on (bāxē hwā) (§ 3.7) the bank of the euphrates. There he met an older male ascetic, abraham. The Life describes abraham as one of the mourners (aβīlā) and without any possessions. more specifically, the syriac text states that he “had renounced what was set apart” (mәsarrәqā ðϕuršānā), perhaps best rendered as “had renounced possessions, including food.”5 The Life presents abraham here as a mourner who

5. see also Life of Rabbula 10, 54, and 56 (overbeck, S. Ephraemi Syri Rabulae . . . opera selecta, 166 and 200–205; tr. Phenix and horn, The Rabbula Corpus, 18–21, 76–83).

54

Cornelia B. Horn

practiced fasting and rejected having his own provisions of food. if one allows the syriac expression to articulate more broadly that abraham “had renounced possessions,” this ascetic emerges already at the initial encounter with Barsauma as the model of one who rejected possessions and gifts—an attitude and ideal that later on Barsauma is said to have lived out—for instance, in response to gift-giving intentions on the part of empress eudocia (§ 96.12–13). in either case, the encounter with abraham introduced the child Barsauma, in the presentation of the Life, to a branch of asceticism, which Barsauma was to imitate in the course of his own career to remarkable perfection. When abraham asked him why he was crying, the child Barsauma responded that he was an orphan whose father had died, and that he sought to be a slave of Christ (§ 3.8). This response characterized him as a fatherless child who was now striving to become a member of a new household, with Christ replacing his biological father as his new master or lord. at the same time, young Barsauma desired to withdraw completely from the world, wanting to go off into the desert (§ 3.9). abraham suggested that he would take the young ascetic to a monastery instead, since the child was too young to dwell in the desert on his own (§ 3.9–10). ancient ascetic hagio-biographies feature the topos of young ascetic apprentices, who needed to receive training from experienced leaders. according to the biographer, the child Barsauma was not attracted to communal ascetic life. Barsauma did not pursue such an option when he realized it meant being separated from the ascetic abraham. instead, he insisted on staying, because god had led him to abraham. living with that ascetic best fulfilled the child’s hopes of finding a replacement for the father figure he had lost. here he was on a path that seemed to suit the child’s interest in engaging more immediately in working for Christ (§ 3.11–12). The monastery, which, through its communal character, could have offered a replacement for a family, was something Barsauma sought to avoid. his encomiast certainly considered the life of the hermit, lived in complete isolation from the world and with no possessions, as superior to that of a monk. Thus, at Barsauma’s tender age, apprenticeship to a hermit was the recommended path for acquiring skills and training in asceticism. in due course, others were attracted to the master-disciple team of abraham and Barsauma (§ 3.13). Those new disciples pursued the same destiny Barsauma followed. The Life describes their achievements with expressions that echo those that characterized Barsauma: these new adepts “became great in god’s service” (ʕәreβw qәðām allāhā), while one of them “achieved great heights of asceticism” (bәðobbārē rawrәβē) (§ 3.13), working signs and miracles both during his life and after death. The embellishments of the ascetic credentials of this anonymous disciple included that he had become a bishop. With bishops come names and records of their activity, but there is no plausible or even implausible identification to be offered. more important than identification is the impression that Barsauma pur-

Ascetic History and Rhetoric in the Life of Barsauma

55

sued the ascetic life in the company of an elite group of ascetics that gathered around abraham. speaking of the monks as becoming “great in god’s service” or reaching “the height of the [ascetic] way [of life]” (bәðobbārē rawrәβē) (§ 3.13) may have been a rhetorical tactic employed by the biographer to give praise to the monks of Barsauma’s monastery. all of these monks were the students or disciples of a master. This may indicate that the troops of marauding ascetics, who according to the Life and the acts of the Council of Chalcedon accompanied Barsauma on his journeys, and who committed acts of violence as presented in the Life of Barsauma and as bemoaned in the testimonies of those who suffered at their hands,6 were individuals who were committed to ascetic ideals and the ascetic life through their dedication to an ascetic leader or father figure. initially, that “master” (rabbā), in the telling of the Life, was abraham. Barsauma unmistakably was recognized as the group’s leader and spiritual father, given that he became, as the Life announces at the beginning and end, the “chief of the ascetics” or more precisely the “head” or “master” “of the mourners” (rīšā ðaβīlē; rabbā ðaβīlē). To ground historical facticity in data derived from a single source is a difficult enterprise. When searching for the ascetical dimensions of the Life of Barsauma that problem is not any different. Yet with regard to the relevance of young age for the profiling of the ascetic hero and the development of the ascetic’s self-identity, the sources allow one to pay attention to additional evidence. insofar as the relationship between Barsauma and abraham was that of a child relating to an ascetic elder as his tutor or substitute father, the Life illustrates a basic component in the pedagogical concept that undergirds ancient notions of ascetic development. The records for the Council of ephesus ii (449) preserve Barsauma’s remarks in support of reinstating the Constantinopolitan ascetic eutyches to the rank of presbyter and to the leadership of his monastery. These comments suggest that Barsauma had internalized an understanding of himself, in his role as a monk, as a child who was acting in deference to the will of others as his spiritual fathers. after nearly all bishops had raised their voices in support of eutyches at the council, Barsauma was introduced as “presbyter and archimandrite” (πρεσβύτερος καὶ ἀρχιμανδρίτης). The acts quote him as saying that he was “following our own fathers as a child” (κἀγὼ ὡς τέκνον ἐξακολουθῶν τοῖς ἰδίοις πατράσιν) when he was bearing witness to eutyches’s orthodoxy and was supporting his reinstatement.7 Barsauma’s words were promptly translated from syriac into greek by a certain monk, whose name 6. see the discussion in michael gaddis, There Is No Crime for Those Who Have Christ: Religious Violence in the Roman Empire, Transformation of the Classical heritage 39 (Berkeley, los angeles, and london: University of California Press, 2006), 188–89. 7. i.884 (112): ACO ii.1.1, 186; tr. Price and gaddis, 1:292. see also ernest honigmann, Le couvent de Barsauma et le patriarcat jacobite d’Antioche et de Syrie. CsCo 146, subsidia 7 (louvain: imprimerie orientaliste l. Durbecq, 1954), 7 n. 5.

56

Cornelia B. Horn

was eusebius. in the plaint in support of eutyches, the monks of eutyches’s monastery did not avail themselves of images relevant for child-parent relationships. it is at least conceivable that Barsauma’s identity as an ascetic was formed and shaped by the experience of his orphanage and early asceticism under the guidance of a spiritual father who replaced his missing, biological father in such a way that Barsauma continued to interpret the world around him, perhaps more strongly than others, through the lens of child-parent relationships. one may argue with good reason therefore that his asceticism was colored by that feature as well. in addition to the importance of Barsauma’s experiences as a child in the development of his ascetic dedication, a second dimension of his life was constituted by the process during which the specific characteristics of his ascetical practice emerged and manifested themselves ever more clearly. in connection with this, the Life likewise demonstrated how he went through a period of establishing himself and coming to be recognized as a leader. T h e a s C e T iC P r o f i l e o f Ba r s aUm a , The Chief of The moUrners

according to conciliar records of the fifth century, Barsauma functioned as the representative of “the most holy archimandrites” of the east. With “a divine letter,” dated to 14 may 449 and received from emperor Theodosius ii, Barsauma was invited to “go to the city of ephesus.” “as the representative of all the reverent archimandrites in the east” (τὸν τόπον ἐπέχουσαν8 πάντων τῶν ἐν τῆι Ἑώιαι θεοσεβεστάτων ἀρχιμανδριτῶν) he was encouraged to “take [his] seat at the holy council that ha[d] been ordered to assemble there, and with the other holy fathers and bishops [he was to] decree what is pleasing to god.”9 as a basis for introducing this innovation that a monk and head of a monastery should vote at a council alongside the bishops, emperor Theodosius referred to Barsauma’s “great labors (τοσοῦτον ὑπομεμένηκεν κάματον) that [his] holiness (ἡ σὴ ἁγιωσύνη) has endured on behalf of the orthodox faith (διὰ τὴν ὀρθόδοξον πίστιν)” and to his “reputation” (τὴν σὴν ὁσιότητα . . . εὐδοκιμοῦσαν) “for purity of life and orthodox faith” (ἐπὶ καθαρότητι βίου καὶ ὀρθοδόξωι πίστει).10 in two further “divine letters,” one dated to the following day and sent by Theodosius ii to Bishop Dioscorus of alexandria, and a second letter on the same matter sent, presumably on or about the same date, to Juvenal of Jerusalem, the 8. The participle is in the feminine form here, since the text does not literally speak of Barsauma, but rather of his reputation: δίκαιον εἶναι νομίζομεν τὴν σὴν ὁσιότητα . . . εὐδοκιμοῦσαν . . . καὶ τὸν τόπον ἐπέχουσαν. 9. ACO ii.1.1, 71, text 48, ll. 27–30; tr. Price and gaddis, 1:137. 10. ACO ii.1.1, 71, text 48, ll. 24–26; tr. Price and gaddis, 1:137 (modified).

Ascetic History and Rhetoric in the Life of Barsauma

57

emperor again spoke of “the most religious presbyter and archimandrite Barsauma (τὸν θεοσεβέστατον πρεσβύτερον καὶ ἀρχιμανδρίτην Βαρσουμᾶν), who has a good reputation for purity of life and orthodox faith (ἐπὶ καθαρότητι βίου καὶ ὀρθοδόξωι πίστει).”11 also in these letters, Theodosius ii explained that in light of the circumstances “that many of the most devout archimandrites of the east together with the orthodox laity are indignant with certain bishops in some of the oriental cities who are said to be infected with the impiety of nestorius, and are fighting on behalf of the orthodox faith” he had deemed it best that Barsauma “should go to the city of ephesus and as the representative of all the most religious archimandrites in the orient should take his seat together with your holiness”— that is, Dioscorus and Juvenal, respectively—“and all the most holy fathers assembled there, and that decisions pleasing to god should be taken on all matters accordingly.”12 in these same letters, the emperor stated his request that the letters’ recipients should take care to “give a favorable reception to the aforesaid most devout archimandrite and make him take part in the holy council.”13 The acts of the Council of Chalcedon provide a record that the letter to Dioscorus was read at ephesus ii and that Juvenal had confirmed orally that he had received a similar letter (ταὐτὰ καὶ ἐμοὶ ἐγράφη) “from the most pious emperors” “about the arrival” (περὶ τοῦ παραγενέσθαι Βαρσουμᾶν) of “the most devout priest and archimandrite Barsauma” (περὶ τοῦ εὐλαβεστάτου πρεσβυτέρου καὶ ἀρχιμανδρίτου Βαρσουμᾶ). moreover, Juvenal had taken the reference to that letter as an occasion at the Council of ephesus ii (449) to encourage the bishops who were gathered at the meeting to “let him [Barsauma] rightfully attend the holy council.”14 This evidence establishes that the political arm of the empire regarded it as beneficial that a monk, Barsauma, would take up a role of leadership and function as a representative of the eastern archimandrites. in this position, Barsauma was granted authority to participate fully in the decision-making process of the council. Theodosius ii may have selected Barsauma for such a position because the authority and recognition he had gained for himself through ascetic achievements, and possibly the reputation he had acquired by this point among the wider lay population as a “holy man,” made him a formidable candidate to represent both the ascetic and the lay communities in the east who were at odds with some of their bishops. in his letters to Dioscorus and Juvenal, emperor Theodosius ii had written that both archimandrites and “the orthodox laity” (ἅμα τοῖς ὀρθοδόξοις λαοῖς) disliked the doctrinal affiliations of some of their bishops and felt they

11. 12. 13. 14.

ACO ii.1.1, 71, text 47, ll. 6–7; tr. Price and gaddis, 1:136. ACO ii.1.1, 71, text 47, ll. 7–10; tr. Price and gaddis, 1:136. ACO ii.1.1, 71, text 47, ll. 12–13; tr. Price and gaddis, 1:136–37 (modified). ACO ii.1.1, 85, texts 108–9, ll. 8–12; tr. Price and gaddis, 1:150.

58

Cornelia B. Horn

needed to “fight on behalf of the orthodox faith.”15 This concern for a united front of archimandrites and laity may have been at the forefront of Theodosius’s mind. Thus, the emperor may have selected Barsauma with the assumption that as a monk he would best represent and unite the two groups of archimandrites and laity and their interests in the east. one sees in the Life of Barsauma some level of familiarity with the historical fact that the emperor wrote to the bishops to appoint and promote Barsauma as a leader for the events at ephesus ii in 449. Yet in the Life of Barsauma, the content of the letters that is in question here is not presented in the form of a set of letters sent to three different recipients. instead, the Life has Theodosius ii issue a single decree that did not play a role in the history leading up to the Council of ephesus in 449 but that instead was an integral part of the proceedings at that council itself. in at least one significant aspect the content of this decree differed from the explicit content of Theodosius’s letters to Dioscorus, Juvenal, and Barsauma that are preserved in greek. if the author of the Life in fact knew the text of these letters, he recast it by placing a much stronger, and potentially historically distorting, emphasis on Barsauma as an ascetic. in the letters, preserved in greek, Theodosius singled out Barsauma for “the good reputation for purity of life and orthodox faith” and “the great labors that [Barsauma] had endured on behalf of the orthodox faith.”16 Theodosius spoke of Barsauma’s “great labors.” Perhaps one may render τοσοῦτον . . . κάματον more literally as the “great fatigue” that Barsauma endured. such terminology might capture well the prayer vigils in standing position, which the hagiographic record ascribed to the monk. his disciples, for instance, are said to have observed that Barsauma gave “the impression of one who was himself asleep on his feet,” yet, watching him, they “could see that he was actually at prayer all the time” (§ 23.1). at other instances the Life comments that Barsauma was one who prayed while his disciples slept (§ 37.4), or who was “asleep on his feet” (§ 90.2), as James of Cyrrhestica had witnessed. Theodosius’s letter may have had Barsauma’s reputation as a vigilant watcher in mind when speaking of his “great fatigue.” The emperor’s comments then placed Barsauma’s asceticism positively and appreciatively in the wider context of Constantinople’s akoimētai or “sleepless monks.”17 likewise Theodosius’s reference to Barsauma’s “purity of life” may constitute an allusion to the

15. ACO ii.1.1, 71, text 47, l. 3; see also Price and gaddis, 1:136. 16. ACO ii.1.1, 71, text 47, ll. 6–7; text 48, ll. 24–25. 17. important here is the Life of Alexander Akoimētos. for the greek text with latin translation, see de stoop, Vie d’Alexandre l’Acémète (Po 6.5). modern translations into english and french are available. see Theokritoff, “The life of our holy father alexander”; Caner, Wandering, Begging Monks, 249–80; and Baguenard, Les moines acémètes. see also Caner, chapter 7, in this volume.

Ascetic History and Rhetoric in the Life of Barsauma

59

ascetic’s struggle against evil forces and for a life of perfection as a monk. When listening closely therefore, one may hear in Theodosius’s letter the references that single out Barsauma as an exemplary and dedicated ascetic. in the decree, which the syriac Life of Barsauma presents, Theodosius is said to have stated that Barsauma was to be not simply a representative of the archimandrites of the east. The scope of authority that the emperor desired Barsauma to hold rather comprised a threefold role: the first dimension consisted of becoming bishop of antioch and thus, in effect, replacing Domnus, who had supported ibas of edessa at the synod at antioch in 448; secondly, in this role, Barsauma should function as “father and director” (aβā wϕaqqōðā) (§ 106.3), and thus as a personal adviser to Theodosius, yet this role was not intended to jeopardize Barsauma’s ascetic commitments; and thirdly, he should be in a position of having control of all bishops and judges, and thus of all ecclesiastical and judicial power, throughout the empire. in effect, the Life of Barsauma suggests that Theodosius desired to have Barsauma become the second-in-command in the administration of all nonmilitary affairs in the empire. With regard to the spiritual affairs at the head of the empire, moreover, the Life suggested that Theodosius envisioned for Barsauma the role of serving as the personal spiritual-father of the emperor, a position that could easily have rivaled that of any of the archbishops of the major cities. This part of the Life, at least, with its claims concerning Theodosius’s vision of Barsauma’s influence, does not appear to reflect historical facts. instead, quite clearly it is the product of an author who promoted asceticism and who aimed at extolling Barsauma as an ascetic using a position of leadership that would have highlighted greatly the value of Barsauma’s asceticism as guiding principle within the empire. The Life seems to have built on ideas about Theodosius’s own ascetic inclinations that already circulated in the empire. Theodosius’s support of asceticism emerges in the text, for instance, in his decree, in which he made provisions for Barsauma that if he agreed to serve as the emperor’s adviser, he would still be able to live as an ascetic. The writings of the church historians sozomen and socrates scholasticus, for instance, preserve evidence for the ascetic discipline that reigned at the imperial palace in Constantinople at the time.18 according to socrates, who displays distinct preferences for the anti-Chalcedonian side, the credit for turning the palace into a monastery went to emperor Theodosius ii.19 other voices placed greater emphasis on the role of the Chalcedonian Pulcheria in the matter. as an 18. for documentation of the references and discussion, see Cornelia B. horn, Asceticism and Christological Controversy in Fifth-Century Palestine: The Career of Peter the Iberian (oxford: oxford University Press, 2006), 64–65; and Kenneth g. holum, Theodosian Empresses: Women and Imperial Dominion in Late Antiquity, Transformation of the Classical heritage 3 (Berkeley, los angeles, and london: University of California Press, 1982), 91. 19. socrates, Hist. eccl. 7.22.4–5 (Pg 67:785; also hansen and Širinjan, 368).

60

Cornelia B. Horn

anti-Chalcedonian source, the Life of Barsauma saw greater benefit in profiling emperor Theodosius ii’s ascetical leanings, or, at least, his tolerance and promotion of asceticism. The Life envisioned that an ascetic like Barsauma would hold, next to the emperor, the highest reins of control in the empire. This feature of the decree that is presented in the Life also appears to extol the role of ascetics by having the control of ascetics supplant episcopal oversight. The evidence of the correspondence that is preserved in the conciliar documents of the fifth century speaks to Barsauma’s special role as representative and leader of a group of archimandrites of the east. These archimandrites, of course, were leaders of various individual monasteries in their own right. The Life of Barsauma attests to its hero’s leadership of a particular group of ascetics, who had previously followed abraham.20 These disciples accompanied him on his travels (e.g., § 44.1). They had adopted the same forms of intensive prayer with weeping and tears that Barsauma practiced, and, at times, they engaged in activities independently of Barsauma. one of his disciples, for instance, was responsible for burning down a pagan temple in the arnon Valley through mournful prayer and the throwing of a stone on which he had spat (§ 44). The particular form of asceticism practiced by Barsauma and the group that surrounded him requires careful examination. it does not suffice to state that the syriac term aβīlā was used as a general designation of an ascetic when the Life of Barsauma was composed. rather, the Life suggests that an aβīlā was a recognizable syrian type of ascetic. When Bishop acacius of melitene in Cappadocia invited Barsauma, because he wanted to become familiar with him and his ascetic authority, the Life has him suggest to his clerics that they “should test this syrian mourner” (aβīlā hānā suryāyā) (§ 60.3). This implies that Barsauma had already gained a reputation outside of the realm of syria for being a syriac Christian, which likely meant a syriac-speaking Christian, and for practicing a form of asceticism that his contemporaries identified with that of the “mourners.” The Life introduces Barsauma already in the headline as “head of the mourners.” it finishes his presentation at the end by calling him the “master of the mourners” (§ 163; see also § 143.2). all the while, the author appears to have been well aware that Barsauma was not the first practitioner of this form of asceticism. one reads in the first paragraph that “there were many mourners (aβīlē sagīʔē ʔīθ hwā) in the time of the victorious Barsauma, but his perfection (gәmīrūθē ðhānā) surpassed that of all the others” (§ 1.2). Barsauma was to be regarded as at least one of the leaders, perhaps the leader of the mourners by virtue of his exceptionally perfect practice of this form of asceticism. That Barsauma held an elevated position is also expressed when the Life speaks of his childhood experiences and on that occasion calls him “this chosen [one] of the mourners” (hānā gaβyā ðaβīlē) (§ 2.3). 20. see horn, “rhetoric and history.”

Ascetic History and Rhetoric in the Life of Barsauma

61

Quite appropriately, therefore, Barsauma apprenticed with abraham, whom the text had introduced as “a certain mourner (aβīlā h. að) called abraham, a man with no possessions” (§ 3.8). The Life of Barsauma places emphasis on a particular outfit that ascetic mourners wore regularly. That outfit was not merely a simple or even a torn and used garment. otherwise it would have been difficult to see any difference between “the habit (σχῆμα) of his mourning (eʔsxēmā ðaβīlūθā),” which one of Barsauma’s disciples took off, and “the clothes of a beggar” (maʔnē ðh. addōrā), which that same disciple then put on when preparing to enter a pagan temple in the arnon Valley (§ 44.1). The question of the mourner’s particular garment takes up considerable space in the Life. The text expands on what is known from elsewhere concerning emperor Theodosius ii’s interest in engaging Barsauma’s services as leader of certain segments of the Christian clientele of the empire. When presenting Theodosius’s respective efforts, the Life specifies twice that the emperor wanted Barsauma to take up service in “the management of the Church and of the poor” and as “a director for the bishops in the cities and for the judges in all regions” (§ 105.3). he also wanted Barsauma to become archbishop of antioch (§ 106.3) and “father and director” of the emperor (§ 106.3) “while remaining in the habit (σχῆμα) of his mourning” (kað īθawhy beʔsxēmā ðaβīlūθā) (§§ 105.3, 106.3). elsewhere the reader learns that “his head was veiled by the great[er] schema of mourning” (mәh. appēy rīšēh beʔsxēmā rabbā ðaʔβīlūθā) (§ 111.2), presumably to allow for privacy, anonymity, and seclusion. other passages inform us that the habit of mourning was made of sackcloth (saqqā), but in Barsauma’s case it also involved “a tunic of iron” (kūθīnā ðɸarzәlā) (§ 79.2–3; see also § 74.4). The choice of sackcloth corresponds well with what anyone, who was conversant with the scriptures, would have expected of a mourner. in numerous places the hebrew Bible depicts the one who mourns as a person dressed in sackcloth (Psalm 30:11, isaiah 22:12), often also in “sackcloth and ashes” (esther 4:3) or as dressed in sackcloth and rolling in ashes (Jeremiah 6:26). The identification of sackcloth as the garment of the mourner had a long history. The garment itself provided easy recognition of the state of its wearer. The Life of Barsauma, however, suggests that whereas Barsauma’s fellow mourners may all have dressed in sackcloth as well, Barsauma added further ascetic rigor to his mourning practice affecting his bodily sensations. his initial ascetic outfit consisted of “rags of sackcloth, of double thickness, patched together with thick threads of wool and hair” (§ 4.1). When journeying on pilgrimage to Jerusalem, moreover, he wore neither shoes nor sandals, and carried “neither purse, nor bag, nor stick” (§ 4.1). his ascetic discipline intensified the scarcity of equipment that scripture had permitted the disciples to provide for their missionary journeys. as Barsauma advanced in the discipline of mourning, he began to wear “an iron tunic under sackcloth” (§ 79.2). The description of the subsequent stage of his

62

Cornelia B. Horn

garment connects Barsauma to the ascetic milieu around antioch. in the presentation of the Life of Barsauma, the story’s hero visited with James of Cyrrhestica (§ 90.1–3), who according to Theodoret of Cyrrhus’s Religious History was the most famous disciple of the ascetic maron and who together with him was a fellow practitioner of open-air asceticism on top of a mountain near antioch.21 Theodoret reported that James of Cyrrhestica distinguished himself by wearing iron chains on his body. even when he suffered “greatest pain from a strong fever,” James still “continued to carry the heavy iron chains wrapped around his body.”22 one cannot establish as a historical fact that Barsauma adopted his own practice of wearing an iron tunic in imitation of the iron chains he saw James wear. syrian ascetic and hagiographic literature reports that other ascetics clad themselves in iron bands, especially employing iron chains as a form of repentance.23 if Barsauma’s iron tunic was not a product of his own ascetical drive, he could have developed this practice, having been inspired by people other than James. on the other hand, the Life of Barsauma seems to have been interested in connecting its hero with the milieu of ascetics whom Theodoret featured in his Religious History, specifically with James of Cyrrhestica. The Life certainly strives to suggest to its readers that James of Cyrrhestica stood in awe before Barsauma and his ascetic feats and was given visionary insights into Barsauma’s spiritual greatness and divine election. on the occasion of Barsauma’s visit, which according to the Life occurred upon James’s invitation of the hero, the Life tells that while Barsauma stood there, “leaning [against a wall], asleep on his feet,” James “saw a ball of fire blazing above the head of the blessed man,” with “the ball of fire remain[ing]” in that position for a long time (§ 90.2). according to the Life, this vision provided James with the impetus to spread Barsauma’s fame among his fellow ascetics. given the lack of any reference to Barsauma in the Religious History, and given the gain in standing that Barsauma was to obtain through the encounter with James of Cyrrhestica, it is perhaps a more likely historical scenario that Barsauma traveled through the regions surrounding antioch that were inhabited by ascetics, visited with, learned from, perhaps trained with, and obtained inspiration from one or several of these ascetics, and through those encounters subsequently refined his own extreme forms of ascetic practice. if indeed he visited with James and spent a night at his site, perhaps Barsauma, like Theodoret, also obtained firsthand notice that “inside

21. Theodoret, Hist. rel. 21.3 (Canivet and leroy-molinghen, 2:72–73; tr. Price, 134); Cornelia B. horn, James of Cyrrhestica: A Disciple of St. Maron, Journal of Maronite Studies 2.1 (1998) = http://maroniteinstitute.org/mari/Jms/january98/James_of_ Cyrrhestica.htm. 22. Theodoret, Hist. rel. 21.8 (Canivet and leroy-molinghen, 2:80–83; tr. Price, 136). 23. arthur Vööbus, History of Asceticism in the Syrian Orient: A Contribution to the History of Culture in the Near East, CsCo 197 (louvain: secrétariat du CorpussCo, 1960), 2:277.

Ascetic History and Rhetoric in the Life of Barsauma

63

his clothing” James of Cyrrhestica used to carry a “great load of iron that bound his waist and his neck, and other chains, two in front and two behind, extending obliquely from the circle round his neck to the circle below, and forming the shape of the letter X, connected the two circles to each other, both in front and behind; and beneath his clothing his arms bore other bonds of this kind round his elbows.”24 Theodoret’s description of how James’s body was covered with bonds of iron all over his upper body and below his garments readily allows one to see how such a burdening of the body with chains could have inspired Barsauma to wear a “tunic of iron” himself. The Life of Barsauma may have chosen to connect its hero with James of Cyrrhestica because Theodoret of Cyrrhus had highlighted the great emphasis James placed on understanding his form of asceticism as an act of repentance for sins. The wearing of iron chains or bonds or tunics of iron then emerges, not as a necessity, but as a supporting characteristic of a syrian penitent mourner, who was dwelling on the top of mountains in remote places. The discussion of the characteristic external features of Barsauma’s appearance that allowed observers to recognize him as a mourner requires brief comments about his hairstyle. Where the text of the hebrew Bible presents images of mourners, baldness of the head is one of the features of the one dressed in sackcloth (isaiah 22:12, ezekiel 27:31, amos 8:10). instructions for monks in the syrian realm included admonitions not to let one’s hair grow long.25 Yet with regard to this specific feature of the mourner one observes a discrepancy between the old Testament model and regulated ascetic practices, on the one hand, and the model of the mourner within syrian asceticism, on the other. Precisely how Barsauma wore his hair emerges as a matter of contention in the Life. Those who wished to charge him with usurping ecclesiastical authority made accusations to the emperor and claimed that he had “his hair cut in the style of a cleric” (§ 111.2). When exploring the interest of the Life in refuting any possible distortions of a proper image of Barsauma as a monk, one finds emperor Theodosius ii’s presumed eyewitness account of Barsauma’s appearance. Theodosius could “see with [his] own eyes that it [i.e., Barsauma’s hair] is twisted into plaits of three strands from his head right down to his heels” (§ 112.3). The parallels that would have suggested themselves to ancient Christian readers derive rather from the new Testament and the literature of the Desert fathers and mothers. The story of Jesus’s encounter with the so-called sinful woman who “stood behind [Jesus] at his feet, weeping, and [who] began to bathe his feet with her tears and to dry them with her hair” (luke 7:38) required that the hair of this penitent lady was long enough to serve as a towel. This pericope had gained a prominent place in syriac biblical exegesis. The syriac Commentary on the Diatessaron, which comprises teachings by ephrem and his students, dedicates considerable space to 24. Theodoret, Hist. rel. 21.8 (Canivet and leroy-molinghen, 2:80–83; tr. Price, 136). 25. see, for instance, Admonitions for the Monks 5 (Phenix and horn, The Rabbula Corpus, 94–95).

64

Cornelia B. Horn

the explication of this passage.26 liturgical poetry from the syriac and greek realms—for example, texts by Jacob of serugh and romanos the melodist—attests to the preferred reception of this story in wider Christian circles.27 Yet when encountering references to ascetics wearing their hair long, ancient audiences may well have been reminded of desert penitents like mary of egypt, whose body was without covering except for her hair when she was living in the desert.28 Thus, when rumors against Barsauma claimed that he had cut his hair like that of a cleric, the critics charged him not only for having usurped an authority within the church that, they thought, did not belong in the hands of a monk. They also challenged the more specific identification of Barsauma as a “mourner.” arising from the discussion of the material pertinent to Barsauma’s hairstyle as ascetic, at least one further observation is relevant for studying the history and rhetoric of asceticism in the Life. The text places its own agenda of writing history plainly in the view of its reader when it has Theodosius report what he heard about Barsauma having cut his hair like a cleric, and contrasts this with what he himself claimed he saw with his own eyes—namely, that Barsauma was wearing his hair braided in three long pigtails: “so what should we believe (nәhaymen) and be sure of (nәšar)? The fact itself, which we see with our eyes (lәsuʕrānā ðaβʕaynayn h. āzēynan)? or the things, which the calumniators have written?” (§ 112.3). With the emperor’s statement, the Life lays claim to the veracity of its presentation of Barsauma’s profile and actions on the basis that what it reports is grounded in the testimony of eyewitnesses, at the very least in the present instance. not to be regarded as trustworthy, on the other hand, are written reports of those who have slanderous intentions. such people the Life disqualifies as “calumniators” (marmәyānē) and “liars” (daggālē) (§ 112.3). That the person offering the eyewitness report in this instance represented the highest secular authority in the empire and pronounced his testimony in support of matters of piety certainly came in handy, independent of whether it was fabricated or not. The Life continues in this instance its tendency to give weight to emperor Theodosius as a promoter of asceticism. here at least, it seems to seek to assign to secular, and not to ecclesiastical, circles the authority to decide whom to recognize as a proper ascetic, and

26. see Commentary on the Diatessaron 7.18 and 10.8–10 (mcCarthy, Ephrem’s Commentary, 137–38 and 170–71). see also ephraem the syrian, Memra on the Sinful Woman (Beck, Ephraem . . . Sermones II, 78–91 [syriac] and 99–113 [german]). 27. see Jacob of sarug, Homilies 51 (on the sinful Woman) (Bedjan, Homiliae selectae . . . 2:402–28; tr. Johnson, “The Sinful Woman”); romanos the melode, Hymns (tr. Koder, Romanos Melodos: Die Hymnen, 2:503–11). 28. for convenient access to the Life of Mary of Egypt, see the translation in Benedicta Ward, Harlots of the Desert: A Study of Repentance in Early Monastic Sources, Cistercian studies 106 (Kalamazoo, mi: Cistercian Publications, 1987).

Ascetic History and Rhetoric in the Life of Barsauma

65

whom not. The regulation of matters pertinent to more radical forms of syrian asceticism, therefore, in the perspective of the Life of Barsauma, did not belong so much in the hands of established church leaders, but in those of the state, at least when this was useful for a ruler’s or an author’s purpose. The wearing of a distinct garment or hairstyle did not exhaust the characteristics of the aβīlē/mourners, as whose leader the Life presents Barsauma. at least some of the mourners with whom Bәarsauma had contact lived high up in the mountains. one day Barsauma “climbed up (sәleq) to the place of a certain mourner (h. að aβīlā) who lived in poverty on a desolate mountain” (§ 52.1). The Life suggests that Barsauma himself spent much time dwelling on mountaintops. Part of his ascetic training in childhood occurred precisely in such locations. The Life tells, for instance, that “the young Barsauma . . . set out again to go to a certain desolate mountain on his own,” where he dwelt “throughout the time of winter under snow and ice.” no one provided him with any food. instead, “he would gather the wild herbs from places that were denuded of snow and get nourishment from these” (§ 5.1). When leaving, he “went to another mountain both high and cold” and again “he fed on grass-roots, until the fruit of the wild trees ripened” (§ 5.2). The life of the mourner then was spent in isolation on the mountaintop, where the ascetic endured an extreme climate in both summer and winter, and where she or he existed on a minimum of food from sources that ordinarily supported only animals. as a teacher of the right way of practicing the asceticism of mourning (rabbā ðaβīlē) (§§ 143.2, 163), Barsauma strictly disciplined fellow mourners not to indulge in cultivating crops, neither for food nor for profit. one day, when a certain mourner whom Barsauma visited on a desolate mountain asked the hero to “pronounce a blessing” over “a few vine-stocks on that same mountain,” which he had planted in order to lay “the beginnings of a vineyard,” Barsauma “was displeased because the mind of that mourner (hū aβīlā) was occupied with plants (nes. bāθā)” (§ 52.1–2). Thus, he predicted in a curse “that no one [would] ever eat [ . . . ] from this vineyard” in the future (§ 52.2). Barsauma’s main interest seems to have been to give a lesson that fellow mourners should not engage in labor, “tend[ing] those grapevines, pruning, tilling, and propping up their branches, year by year” (§ 52.2). all of their efforts would be in vain. at least by implication, this story illustrates that the cultivation of plants for the production of commendable foods from which the ascetics themselves could derive benefit should not be a concern of “mourners.” Ba r s aUm a , T h e s o n o f fa sT i n g

The definition of what a mourner was not supposed to do is subordinate in the Life of Barsauma to the rich depiction of the key activities that positively defined a “mourner” and her or his expected activities: fasting and standing in prayer while shedding tears. some are said to have perceived Barsauma as one who “groan[ed] all night and

66

Cornelia B. Horn

moan[ed] all day,” who was “broiled by fasting and scorched by thirst” (§ 74.4). These features in their turn fit well with biblical depictions of mourners. in the hebrew Bible, mourning was accompanied by fasting, weeping, and lamenting (esther 4:3, isaiah 22:12, ezekiel 27:31, Joel 2:12). The fasting of the one who mourned could take on more extreme forms. ezra 10:6, for instance, depicted ezra as “not eat[ing] bread or drink[ing] water, for he was mourning over the faithlessness of the exiles.” The person who mourned typically assumed a posture of being bowed down (Psalm 35:14), sometimes also lying prostrate (Psalm 38:6). one finds strong resonances of these forms of fasting, weeping, and praying in the depiction of Barsauma in the Life. for the voices that were critical of Barsauma, he was one who fasted outwardly, but who as “a criminal imposter” “eats and drinks great quantities of meat and wine“ (§ 111.2). such a statement accused him of not fasting at all, but instead of indulging in ordinary, regular, sumptuous foods at those times when people were not watching him. The Life presented these accusations as part of what Barsauma’s critics had communicated to Theodosius ii in order to ruin the monk’s high standing with the emperor. Theodosius was said to have heard, but rejected, such claims as incongruent with what he could observe when meeting with Barsauma (§§ 111.4, 112.2–3). instead of blackening Barsauma’s reputation as a faster, then, such accusations served in the Life to highlight through their contrast the radical intensity of Barsauma’s ascetic performance. in a way that is similar to the representations of other ascetics in the Life—for instance, that of Bishop mari of Qarrath in arabia who “had forsworn, among other foods, bread, wine and oil” (§ 118.4)—Barsauma is featured as a hero, who practiced abstinence from basic food items, including bread, wine, oil, and water (§ 10.1). The only nourishment he was said to have allowed his body once a week, on the first day of the week during winter, and every other day during summer, for a period of fifty-four years, were greens and fruits. Perhaps the liquids contained in the greens and fruits he permitted himself supplied his body with some basic level of moisture. Yet the main point of these specific restrictions was not that Barsauma ate almost nothing. although Barsauma took “some salad,” the text did not specify the quantity of fruits from the trees that he consumed (§ 10.2). Thus, the amount of food intake is not directly an issue. instead, Barsauma fasted by not allowing anything that was produced through the use of a plow to enter his body. following scripture, the cultivation of grains for baking bread presupposes the fallen state of humankind. only after adam and eve had left paradise, that is, after the fall, did cultivation of the ground and agricultural production, plowing the land, sowing seeds, and growing corn and grains for baking bread, become a necessity (genesis 3:17–19, 4). The ascetic who refrained from bread therefore undertook a step on the path of returning to the prelapsarian state of paradise. ancient Christian literature in syriac that promoted fasting—for instance, ephrem’s “hymns on fasting”—repeatedly identified abstention from bread as a

Ascetic History and Rhetoric in the Life of Barsauma

67

discipline to be observed by those who fasted, whether they were adults or children.29 Those liturgical hymns and the Life of Barsauma differed less with regard to the qualitative approach to fasting expected of practitioners. instead, these hymns encouraged a discipline of fasting among all Christians during the regular fasting periods of the church, especially the forty-day lenten season. Barsauma’s fasting discipline gained its radical character from the fact that in his practice lent extended for the whole length of his life. ernest honigmann saw connections between Barsauma’s fasting and the practices of those, who, according to rabbula’s letter to gemelinus of Perrhe, misused the eucharistic gifts for feeding their ordinary hunger and thirst.30 from the emphasis on Barsauma’s vegetarian diet and the fact that it was available in seemingly sufficient quantities, as it is featured in the Life, it is not obvious that there would indeed have been a need for Barsauma and his fellow ascetics to rely on the consecrated bread and wine as supplementary food. The proposed parallel to concerns expressed in the rabbula correspondence then seems to lack necessity, although a certain possibility remains. Yet Barsauma may fit in best with the group of grazers, feeding on grass, herbs, and other plant matter, that are the subject of depictions of radical syrian asceticism elsewhere. another dimension of Barsauma’s profile as a faster requires additional emphasis. The Life implies that its hero worked miracles through his fasting practices. Those miracles, in turn, inspired regular folk to perceive fasting as a positive value, to be adopted in the lives of their own families. in a story featuring the plight of a wife who suffered ill treatment from her husband and in-laws for not having conceived any child, Barsauma intervened. from heaven, as the story suggests, he obtained the good news that the woman would receive “the fruit of mercy and consolation.” Ten months later, he learned through a letter of the birth of a baby girl, whom the family had named Bathsauma, that is, “Daughter of fasting” (§ [64].4). The Life suggests with this choice of name that the family recognized that the grace for the conception and birth of the child had been achieved through Barsauma’s standing with god as a faster. Barsauma’s miracle, moreover, seems to have had the pedagogical effect that the family was willing to attach themselves and the future of their members to the promotion of the message that fasting was to be regarded as

29. ephraem the syrian, Hymns on Fasting iV.5 (Beck, Ephraem . . . Hymnen de Ieiunio 10 [syriac] and 8 [german]). 30. honigmann, Le couvent de Barsauma, 29–32. for the syriac text of rabbula’s letter to gemellinus, see overbeck, Ephraemi Syri Rabulae episcopi . . . opera selecta, 231–38. The text, accompanied by an english translation, is also found in Phenix and horn, The Rabbula Corpus, 180–99. for a translation of the material that is incorporated in Zacharias rhetor’s Chronicle and its context there, see geoffrey greatrex, translations from syriac and arabic sources by robert Phenix and Cornelia horn, with additions to the introductory material by sebastian Brock and Witold Witakowski, The Chronicle of Pseudo-Zachariah Rhetor: Church and War in Late Antiquity, 403–12.

68

Cornelia B. Horn

exceptionally valuable. With a story like this, the Life of Barsauma pursued the catechetical goal of instilling the value of fasting among the ordinary populace, a goal that is similar to what liturgical poets like ephrem the syrian were able to achieve when composing formal liturgical hymns on fasting during the lenten period. Ba r s aUm a , a m a n o f T e a r s

The Life’s emphasis on fasting stands in parallel to frequent references that speak of weeping and the shedding of tears. in some cases, tears are being shed because of loss, fear, or regret. Yet the Life depicts Barsauma prominently as a man of tears. This characterization takes its start already during Barsauma’s early childhood. When the child learned that the ascetic abraham planned to leave him in the care of a monastery, Barsauma “began to weep out loud” and explained in tears why god’s plan was for him to stay with abraham (§ 3.12). most importantly though, the presence of tears singled out Barsauma’s prayer as special. During his times of private prayers, Barsauma used to “to groan out loud, shedding tears of profound emotion while he prayed” (§ 11.1). During winter “he would begin the morning in prayer, groaning deeply and weeping astonishing tears” (§ 20.2). Yet also throughout the day, “the tears streamed from his eyes until the soil of the earth in front of him became as malleable as clay” (§ 20.2). Throughout the day, “the sound of his groaning never ceased” (§ 20.2). for the most part, Barsauma is said to have engaged in his prayer of mourning and weeping at a specific place that was located at a considerable distance from his fellow ascetics. During such prayer, he would take up a special position. he “would stand with the soles of both feet planted squarely on the ground, then bow down in prayer with his two hands clasped together behind his back from morning until evening. all day long his body was bent double, his head right down beside the soles of his feet” (§ 20.1). his physical posture during prayer, in which he bent down his head to the ground and held his hands clasped behind his back, suggested that he embodied the position of a slave in front of his master. at least within the framework of the ideas presented in the Life, such a position fulfilled in part the young Barsauma’s desire to become “a slave of Christ” (§ 3.6). Tears also added a special note to Barsauma’s appearance among his fellow ascetics. When he preached sermons to the monks during mealtimes, weeping accompanied his instructions (§ 21.1). Perhaps the forty-ninth sign recounted in the Life, which tells of the seraph, who collected Barsauma’s tears during his prayer, illustrates best the spiritual value that the Life assigned to its hero’s practice of shedding tears in prayer. one of the disciples observed Barsauma in his customary prayer position, “bent double with his hands clasped behind him” (§ 75.1). That disciple claimed to have seen an angel, “one of the seraphs of heaven,” standing in front of Barsauma during that time. With two of its wings the seraph collected Barsauma’s tears, and with two further wings the seraph wiped away their traces (§ 75.2). When Barsauma con-

Ascetic History and Rhetoric in the Life of Barsauma

69

cluded his prayer, straightening himself up from his bowing position and sealing his prayer with the sign of the cross (§ 75.3), the seraph placed two of his wings “around the blessed man’s neck” as if embracing the ascetic. next the seraph began an upward movement, with “the soles of his feet r[ising] from the ground” and “float[ing] up and st[anding] on his shoulders” (§ 75.3). eventually, “when he began to walk away from that place, the seraph lifted the soles of its feet again and stood on his head. Then, suddenly, it changed into a cross of light and flew up off the head into heaven” (§ 75.4). an ancient reader may have taken away from this marvelous story that Barsauma’s tears were collected on earth by heavenly beings and carried up into the heavenly heights, to be presented before the very face of god, where the seraphim offered their customary services. This may have confirmed or illustrated for ancient audiences the words of Psalm 56:8, “You have kept count of my tossings; put my tears in your bottle. are they not in your record?” any reader or listener would readily have understood that Barsauma’s prayers were guaranteed to reach god’s presence and thus effect what they set out to accomplish. a n C i e n T sY r iaC C o n T e X T s i n a s C e T iC l i T e r aT U r e

in order to evaluate in a more concentrated fashion the place of the Life of Barsauma in the history of ascetic spirituality, it is necessary to situate at least some aspects of Barsauma’s ascetic spirituality over and against related texts that may have served as a literary context. like the better known stylites, the “mourners,” “mountaineers,” and “solitaries” also had come to represent accustomed forms of expressions of the syrian ascetic temperament in the fifth century.31 as these syrian ascetics practiced their distinct forms of anachōrēsis—of withdrawal from the world—they left behind, at least temporarily, the life of the church in urban settings and sought out environments that seemed better suited to the pursuit of their ascetic inclinations. history has preserved a good-sized body of syriac ascetic texts that focus precisely on the mountaineers, the solitaries, and the mourners. in the past, following tradition and especially under the leadership of arthur Vööbus, these texts were attributed to ephrem the syrian and identified as works of the fourth century. edward mathews’s detailed manuscript studies, however, allowed him to show that at least some of these texts were ascribed to isaac of antioch in the fifth 31. sidney h. griffith, “asceticism in the Church of syria: The hermeneutics of the early syrian monasticism.” in Asceticism, ed. Vincent l. Wimbush and richard Valantasis (new York: oxford University Press, 1995), 222. for an earlier discussion of the terminology, see also edmund Beck, “ein Beitrag zur Terminologie des ältesten syrischen mönchtums,” in Antonius Magnus Eremita 356–1956, ed. Basilius steidle, studia anselmiana 38 (rome: herder, 1956), 254–67.

70

Cornelia B. Horn

century.32 The texts in question include what is still referred to as Ephrem’s Testament, the Letter to the Mountaineers, and several metrical sermons, carrying titles like On the Solitary Life of the Anchorites, On Hermits, Solitaries, and Mourners, or On Solitaries.33 These works clearly date to the time after ephrem and reveal developments in syrian asceticism from the fifth century onward.34 The depiction of Barsauma in the Life of Barsauma fits in very well with the image of the ideal “mourner” and “mountaineer” that is envisioned in these compositions. in the metrical sermon that is entitled On the Hermits, Desert-Dwellers, and Mourners, one reads about these ascetics, for instance, that “instead of delicacies, they eat grass and roots,”35 and that “like birds, they rise up and dwell on top of the rocks.”36 “at mealtime, they place upon their knees the herbs, which they take as food, instead of (placing prepared foods) on tables,”37 “they, whose drink is not wine but water, and on whose bodies one finds dirt instead of oil and ointment.”38 as the list of praises continues, the anonymous poet also lauds the ones “who instead of [being covered] in silk, go around [covered] in horse-cloth (bardaʕθā) and stripped bare [otherwise] and who instead of being equipped with beautiful shoes, are walking barefoot (bəh. eɸyāyūθ̄ ā).”39 The preceding discussion has already presented references to Barsauma’s garment of sackcloth and his journeying on pilgrimage without shoes. The Life, however, emphasizes that such practices held throughout the group of his followers. in one case the Life had Barsauma speak of his fellow monks as being “unwilling to wear shoes on their feet” even in the midst of the harshest winter frost and, thus, of being at risk that when walking “barefoot (h. eɸyāɸīθ) in these extreme conditions . . . they will die” (§ 70.3). The comparison between the ascetic life and the life of angels is a well-known topos in ancient Christian literature.40 Yet the texts under discussion are more spe-

32. see mathews, “‘on solitaries’: ephrem or isaac.” 33. for editions and german translations of these texts, see edmund Beck, ed. and tr., Des heiligen Ephraem des Syrers Sermones IV, CsCo 334–335, script. syr. 148–149 (louvain: secrétariat du CorpussCo, 1973); and mathews, ed. and tr., isaac of antioch, A Homily on Solitaries, Hermits, and Mourners. 34. griffith, “asceticism in the Church of syria,” 221–22. 35. (Ps.-)ephraem, Sermon ii.67–68 (Beck, Ephraem . . . Sermones IV, 18 [syriac] and 23 [german]). The translation offered here is by the present author. for an earlier english translation, see amar, “on hermits and Desert Dwellers.” 36. (Ps.-)ephraem, Sermon ii.71–72 (Beck, Ephraem . . . Sermones IV, 18 [syriac] and 23 [german]). 37. (Ps.-)ephraem, Sermon ii.79–82 (Beck, Ephraem . . . Sermones IV, 18 [syriac] and 23 [german]). 38. (Ps.-)ephraem, Sermon ii.83–86 (Beck, Ephraem . . . Sermones IV, 18 [syriac] and 23 [german]). 39. (Ps.-)ephraem, Sermon ii.89–92 (Beck, Ephraem . . . Sermones IV, 18 [syriac] and 23 [german]). 40. The classic study is still Karl suso frank, ΑΓΓΕΛΙΚΟΣ ΒΙΟΣ: Begriffsanalytische und begriffsgeschichtliche Untersuchung zum “engelgleichen Leben” im frühen Mönchtum, Beiträge zur geschichte des alten mönchtums und des Benediktinertums 26 (münster: aschendorff, 1964).

Ascetic History and Rhetoric in the Life of Barsauma

71

cific and are so in parallel ways. Both in the Life of Barsauma and in the syriac metrical sermons on mourners and mountaineers the practitioner of extreme forms of asceticism has joined the very company of the angels in a seemingly literal sense. The marvelous vision of the seraphim descending from heaven and ministering to Barsauma while collecting his tears has already been introduced above. in the parallel material in the anonymous metrical sermon On the Hermits, Desert-Dwellers, and Mourners, one reads that “those who do not see human beings, but only animals” are also those “to whom, instead of the relatives, whom they have left behind, angels are coming down.”41 elsewhere that sermon speaks of the presence of angels surrounding the ascetic, especially after satan has been conquered.42 This same sermon continues its praise of the mourners via ascribing quasiliturgical qualities to the mourners’ tears and weeping. Thus, one may read: Their bodies are temples of the spirit, their minds are churches, and their prayer is pure incense, and their tears are sweet-smelling smoke. Their groans are like a sacrifice, their psalmody [like] cheerful melodies. Their sighs are pearls, and their chastity is like beryl. When their tears are streaming down, they chase harm away from the earth, and when their petition is lifted up, it fills the earth with remedies.43

next to quasi-liturgical mourning and tears, groans and sighs that resemble sweetsmelling smoke reminiscent of angelic warfare, fasting with nothing but grass and roots, and being surrounded by angelic armies, this fifth-century and later poetry in sermon format that glorifies the lives of radical ascetics also matches well with the variety of ascetic postures for prayer and tests of endurance, which the reader of the Life of Barsauma encounters in the description of its hero. in On the Hermits, DesertDwellers, and Mourners one reads about the ascetics’ postures for prayers and vigils: When they are bending the knees in prayers, they wet the ground with their tears, and when their sighs ascend, the watchers in heaven rejoice. There is one, who chose not to lie down, and so he keeps vigil honorably. and there is one, who chose not to sit down, and so he stands upright in purity.44

These lines display well that among mourners different preferences for prayer postures and vigils were en vogue. some chose to kneel, although more precise positions 41. (Ps.-)ephraem, Sermon ii.93–96 (Beck, Ephraem . . . Sermones IV, 18 [syriac] and 23–24 [german]). 42. (Ps.-)ephraem, Sermon ii.165–70 (Beck, Ephraem . . . Sermones IV, 20 [syriac] and 25 [german]). 43. (Ps.-)ephraem, Sermon ii.97–108 (Beck, Ephraem . . . Sermones IV, 18–19 [syriac] and 24 [german]). 44. (Ps.-)ephraem, Sermon ii.473–80 (Beck, Ephraem . . . Sermones IV, 26–27 [syriac] and 33 [german]).

72

Cornelia B. Horn

similar to what the Life of Barsauma recorded are not specified. others kept vigil while standing, restricting themselves in addition never to lie down or not to sit. The Life singles out Barsauma, for instance, when it states that for fifty-four years “he refused to lie and sit down again until the day of his death” (§ 7.2). emphasis on Barsauma as the first one who took it upon himself always to stand in his ascetic practice and thus never to sit or to lie down then aimed at setting him up as the initiator and leader in practices that in similar form were also executed by others. The competitive atmosphere that seems to have wafted through the realm of the syrian ascetical landscape can still be grasped in the Life of Barsauma. There, one reads of critics of the story’s hero who accused Barsauma that although he “claims that he does not [even] sit down,” in fact “he lies on soft cloth all night long” (§ 111.3). such parallels from ancient syriac compositions that were widely available illustrate well that many of the features of the portrait of Barsauma the chief of the mourners, the faster who was engaging in battle against his own body and the forces of evil, and the man of tears whom angels came to visit, comfort, and connect directly to the heavenly realm were not surprisingly new features in the perception of syriac-speaking audiences. Yet whereas the modern reader may draw as conclusion from such parallels that they are indicators that weaken the claims to the historicity of the story, the person, and the ascetic profile presented in the text, for the ancient reader, by contrast, such parallels, over and against which speakers of syriac heard and received the Life, would have demonstrated the historical authenticity of the story. The Life told ascetic history, because it fit in with established tradition.

3

Barsauma’s Travels to the holy land and Jewish history günter stemberger

ever since françois nau published excerpts of the syriac Life of Barsauma and studies of some episodes of the syrian monk confronting Jews, these have been used by Jewish historians as a valuable source for the history of Palestine in the early fifth century. The miraculous elements are omitted, but the kernel of the narrative is considered to be historically reliable. eminent examples of this approach are michael avi-Yonah,1 Zeev rubin,2 and hagith sivan.3 This approach is also typical for historians of the early church, such as silvia acerbi.4 only a very recent study in hebrew of the Life by reuven Kiperwasser and serge ruzer deals with the 1. michael avi-Yonah, The Jews of Palestine: A Political History from Bar Kokhba War to the Arab Conquest (oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1976). 2. Zeev rubin, “Christianity in Byzantine Palestine: missionary activity and religious Coercion,” The Jerusalem Cathedra: Studies in the History, Archaeology, Geography, Ethnography of the Land of Israel (Jerusalem and Detroit: Wayne state University Press, 1983), 3:97–113. 3. hagith sivan, Palestine in Late Antiquity (oxford: oxford University Press, 2008), 175–80, 215–17. although sivan, Palestine, 215 is more interested in the rhetoric of the controversy and calls the vita Barsumae “a panegyrical biography,” she nevertheless seems to accept much of its contents as historical facts. 4. silvia acerbi, “il potere dei monaci nei concili orientali del v secolo: il Costantinopolitano eutiche e il siro Bar sauma,” Studia Historica/Historia Antigua 24 (2006): 291–313. see also her earlier doctoral thesis, “Conflitti politico-ecclesiastici” (PhD diss., Universidad de Cantabria, 1999), published as Conflitti politico-ecclesiastici in oriente nella tarda antichità: Il II concilio di Efeso (449), ilu. revista de Ciencias de las religiones 5 (madrid: Universidad Complutense, 2001); acerbi, “Terror y violencia antijudía en oriente durante el siglo V: la biografía del archimandrita sirio Bar sauma,” in Formas y usos de la violencia en el mundo romano, ed. gonzalo Bravo Castañeda and raúl gonzález salinero (madrid: signifer, 2007), 277–90. i thank silvia acerbi for kindly sending me copies of her work.

73

74

Günter Stemberger

text from a narratological perspective and pushes the historical questions to the background.5 When i first studied the reports about Barsauma,6 i was extremely skeptical as to their historical value. my analysis was, of course, based on françois nau’s publications, and thus necessarily limited. it is therefore a welcome opportunity to return to the subject on the basis of the full edition and translation by andrew Palmer. What impresses the reader above all is the consistently literary character of this Life, a hagiographic text replete with miracles, centered on the supernatural capacities and extraordinary exploits of its hero. at the same time, its author seems to know the geography of syria and Palestine rather well and mentions a number of persons and facts that are also documented in other sources. The question arises of how such a text can be critically used for historical purposes. in the following, i shall try to approach this problem with special emphasis on Jewish history, for which the Life offers much material in the context of Barsauma’s four travels to Jerusalem, the destruction of synagogues by him and his monks, and the confrontation with Jews in Jerusalem when the empress eudocia resided in the holy land. geograPhY

regarding the geography and administrative division of the holy land, no details are given for Barsauma’s first journey to Jerusalem. The second journey might be approximately dated by a reference to simeon the stylite, who was still on his lowest pillar (§ 32.2–3) and thus early in his career as a stylite (some time after 423), but the passage is a later addition to the text and thus of no real help regarding chronology. The Life does not say explicitly that Barsauma passed through the region of antioch or came close to Qalaat seman. The statement that on his way he destroyed synagogues of the samaritans (§ 34.1) might imply that he passed through samaria, but there were sizable samaritan communities along the mediterranean coast as well, especially in Caesarea and Jaffa. more interesting is the fact that from Jerusalem he traveled on to mount sinai, going by the Desert Way. returning from the sinai, he again took the Desert Way (§ 36.7). for pilgrims traveling from Jerusalem to the sinai, the more common way would have been through the negev; therefore, some authors identify reqem d-gaya (§ 34.3)

5. reuven Kiperwasser and serge ruzer, “The holy land and its inhabitants in the Pilgrimage narrative of the Persian monk Bar sauma,” Cathedra 148 (2013): 41–70. see ruzer and Kiperwasser for a revised english version in this volume. 6. günter stemberger, Juden und Christen im Heiligen Land: Palästina unter Konstantin und Theodosius (munich: C.h. Beck, 1987); updated english version: stemberger, Jews and Christians in the Holy Land: Palestine in the Fourth Century (edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000).

Barsauma’s Travels to the Holy Land and Jewish History

75

Damascus

Ptolemais

Gerasa

TRA

Caesarea Sebaste

JAN A

Bostra

Neapolis

Jaffa

Diospolis Jericho

Rabbat Ammon Esbus (Heshbon) Madaba

Jerusalem Hebron Gaza

Desert Way?

Mamre Beer Sheva

Areopolis (Rabbat Moab)

Elusa Mampsis

NOV

A

Oboda Desert Way?

Negev

Petra

W adi Musa

Desert Way? N 50 km

Via Maritima Via Trajana Nova Mount Sinai

VIA

Reqem d-Gaya?

Aila

map 3.1. Barsauma’s Palestine and travel

with oboda or mampsis, contrary to the identification of reqem with Petra in the Onomasticon of eusebius (144). if we accept the identification of reqem with Petra, the Desert Way is clearly the Via nova Trajana, the north-south thoroughfare from Damascus to aila on the gulf of eilat, a garrison of a roman legion since ca. 300. rabbat moab is also along the road.

76

Günter Stemberger

But Petra is miles away from the Via nova Trajana, as is also the nabatean village gaya just outside the Wadi musa, through which a narrow ravine, the sik, leads to Petra. neither gaya nor Petra fits the description given in § 34.6: “Your city is built on a mountain with cliffs on every side. . . . There is no way we can go round on the outside.” Whoever did not want to go there could pass via the Via nova without ever seeing gaya or Petra, which, incidentally, at that time already had a Christian community and was no longer fully pagan. The place-name reqem geah is mentioned in the list of places forming the border of israel in Tosefta sheviit 4:11. The list has often been studied, and for many names there is no unanimity; for reqem d-gaya a place near Petra is suggested most frequently, but localization southwest of Beer sheva has also been proposed.7 The main problem with the proposed route is that it would lead the traveler from Jerusalem to Jericho and across the Jordan up to esbus (heshbon) north of madaba where he would reach the Via nova—a long detour (and the pilgrim would miss hebron and mamre, two important pilgrim sites since the early fourth century). if we identify reqem with Petra, there would be the possibility that Barsauma left the Via nova to turn west to Petra; after having passed through the city, he would have continued on the main road leading from Petra to gaza until the junction with the road through the araba down to aila. This is again a detour, but it would fit the description of why he had to ask the inhabitants to let him pass through the city. The route looks strange, but is not impossible. for his third journey, Barsauma takes the ship via Cyprus, which would be rather normal from antioch. But why go down the whole way to laodicea (ad mare, present-day latakia: § 78.1), and if so, why not take a ship along the mediterranean coast? might it only be in order to have the opportunity to insert the story about Barsauma’s adventures at sea (with some parallels in the biblical book of Jonah)? Barsauma and his monks probably landed in Caesarea, since sebaste is the first city mentioned. They obviously took the road to Jerusalem via samaria; the more common route would have been along the coast to Diospolis (lydda) and from there up to Jerusalem. Their way back home led them again through samaria. The fourth journey took them by boat from antioch to Palestine and then on the road to Jerusalem, without giving any details (§ 90.3–4). The return journey was again by boat (§ 96.20). Thus, the travel routes of Barsauma and his monks deviate in some important details from the standard routes known from early pilgrims’ itineraries. This is also true for the voyage via Cyprus, which might be explained by a sea storm that took 7. see gottfried reeg, Die Ortsnamen Israels nach der rabbinischen Literatur, Tübinger atlas des Vorderen orients, Beihefte, reihe B, 51 (Wiesbaden: reichert, 1989), 592–624; Peter freimark and Wolfgang-friedrich Krämer, Die Tosefta, vol. 2, Demai-Schebiit (stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1971), 197–210.

Barsauma’s Travels to the Holy Land and Jewish History

77

their boat far off the normal route; but such a storm is mentioned only once they had already left Cyprus (§ 78.1). even stranger is the detour from Jerusalem to the sinai via Transjordan and reqem/Petra.8 it might be caused by the wish to insert the stories about reqem and rabbat moab, which originally might have been independent of Barsauma’s travel route (provided we consider his travels to the sinai to be historical facts).9 T h e r e l ig ioU s D i s T r i BU T io n i n T h e ho lY l a n D

When Barsauma first traveled to Jerusalem, he was alone and still a child,10 and therefore was persecuted by the inhabitants of the land: “now at that time pagans

8. sivan, Palestine, 58, writes: “one of these roads led from mount sinai to aila (eilat) on the red sea and thence northward via Petra and the Via nova Traiana, turning westward to Jerusalem via livias and Jericho.” sivan, Palestine, 58 n. 24 refers to the pilgrim of Piacenza who “refers to two routes for travelling from the sinai back to Jerusalem in the late sixth century, one via egypt and the northern coast of the sinai to gaza, and the other via aila and Petra.” But the text does not speak of Petra: “et quia iam se complebant dies festi hysmahelitarum, praeco exiit, ut nullus subsisteret per heremum, per quo ingressi sumus. alii per aegyptum, alii per arabiam reuerterentur in sanctam ciuitatem. De monte syna usque in arabiam ciuitatem, quae uocatur abela [aila], sunt mansiones Vii” (39–40, Csel 39, 214). The text is much later than Barsauma’s period and speaks of an emergency situation after a festival of the arabs when the normal route through the sinai was not secure and therefore the pilgrims were advised to take a detour, either via egypt and then along the mediterranean coast, or via the eastern shore of the sinai going up to eilat. it does not say that one should continue along the Via Trajana; the route through the negev would be the more natural choice. neither do earlier texts imply a route to the sinai via the Via Trajana. egeria 1–12 (Csel 39, 37–50) describes the return to Jerusalem (identical to the way down from Jerusalem to the sinai) as leading from sinai to faran, the red sea, and on to the mediterranean; the visit to mount nebo is an extra excursion from Jerusalem and back. Theodosius, De situ terrae sanctae 27 (early sixth century) (Csel 39, 148), describes a way from Jerusalem to elusa in the negev and on to aila and the sinai. no text speaks of passing through Petra and traveling along the Via Trajana. only about a century later is a Jerusalemite monk said to have taken the route across the Jordan to go to the sinai, but he never got beyond livias not far from madaba: John moschus, Pratum spirituale 1 (Pg 87.3:2853), as quoted by sivan, Palestine, 62. in his time there was already a whole cluster of monastic communities in the region of madaba, which might explain the attraction of this route for a monk. 9. as documented by Brouria Bitton-ashkelony, “from sacred Travel to monastic Career: The evidence of late antique syriac hagiography,” Adamantius 16 (2010): 370 pilgrimage to Palestine was a topos in syriac hagiographic literature: “late antique pilgrimage to Palestine, sinai and the egyptian desert fathers as narrated in syriac hagiography—whether it really occurred or not—is an integral part of the syriac ascetic discourse, serving to shape monastic identity. . . . even if we assume that many accounts of pilgrimage in syriac hagiographical texts should be considered as topos, the choice of this particular topos was a deliberate act of the hagiographer aimed at shaping the charismatic authority of his hero.” This is not to suggest that Barsauma’s travels never occurred, but it helps to explain the many inconsistencies and imaginary details in the description of these travels. 10. on the religious distribution in the holy land, cf. Claudine Dauphin, La Palestine byzantine: Peuplement et populations, 3 vols., Bar international series 726 (oxford: archaeoPress, 1998). Bar

78

Günter Stemberger

abounded in Palestine, Phoenicia and arabia. Christians were as yet few in number in those countries. The Jews and the samaritans, on the other hand, were rich. They persecuted the Christians of that region” (§ 4.2). as a general statement, this is not quite correct for the time of the journey, sometime after 420. it is true that paganism was still strong at the time of Julian and decades afterward, up to the end of the fifth century, though more so in arabia and parts of Phoenicia than in Palestine; there Christianity was still very weak, especially in the region of gaza, where a Christian bishop still encountered strong opposition in 402 when he had the marnas temple destroyed with the help of the imperial authorities, as described in the Life of Porphyrius attributed to marcus Diaconus.11 many inhabitants of the cities along the mediterranean coast and in the negev still kept their former traditions.12 one has to differentiate between the different parts of the country when speaking of the relative strength of pagans, Jews, and samaritans as compared to the Christian communities. The most common pilgrims’ route from syria to Jerusalem would have been down the mediterranean coast, turning eastward only at Jaffa or Diospolis (lydda) to follow the road to Jerusalem. if so, one would not have had much occasion to encounter Jews or samaritans (this is clear from the early pilgrims’ accounts). it is a stereotype that Jews and samaritans were rich; but many communities certainly profited from the general economic rise of the province, resulting from the strong investments in Christian churches and monasteries by the imperial families and rich private benefactors, but also from the continuous stream of pilgrims. it is also characteristic that the Life speaks only of Jews and samaritans who persecuted the lone child, but not of the pagans, who, according to the Life, were still so numerous.

sauma’s first trip to Jerusalem alone and as still a child is consonant with a topos in syriac literature; see Cornelia B. horn, “Children as Pilgrims and the Cult of holy Children in the early syriac Tradition,” Aram 18–19 (2006–7): 439–62. Cf. also the contribution of horn in this volume. 11. But see adelheid hübner, introduction to Vita Sancti Porphyrii, by marcus Diaconus (freiburg: herder, 2013), 66–68; with other recent authors, hübner considers this vita as a fictional biography of minimal historical worth that might, however, have some value as witness to certain literary and hagiographical trends in late antique Palestine. The destruction of the serapeion in alexandria (in 392) seems to have served as a model for the description of the destruction of the marneion, including the role of the roman official Cynegius (67–88). see also Zeev rubin, “Porphyrius of gaza and the Conflict between Christianity and Paganism in southern Palestine,” in Sharing the Sacred: Religious Contacts and Conflicts in the Holy Land, First–Fifteenth Centuries CE, ed. arieh Kofsky and guy g. stroumsa (Jerusalem: Yad izhak Ben-Zvi, 1998), 31–66 for a syriac original of the greek and georgian versions of the vita. 12. see nicole Belayche, Iudaea—Palaestina: The Pagan Cults in Roman Palestine (Second to Fourth Century), religion der römischen Provinzen 1 (Tübingen: mohr siebeck, 2001); emmanuel friedheim, Rabbinisme et paganisme en Palestine romaine: Étude historique des Realia talmudiques (Ier–IVème siècles), religions in the graeco-roman World 157 (leiden: Brill, 2006).

Barsauma’s Travels to the Holy Land and Jewish History

79

T h e D e s T rU C T io n o f sY nag o g U e s

on his second journey to Jerusalem, probably in the 420s, Barsauma took forty disciples with him: “When he reached Phoenicia, arabia, and Palestine, he began to demolish the Jewish sabbath-houses, destroy the samaritan synagogues, and burn down the pagan temples” (§ 34.1). in the Christian restoration following the death of emperor Julian, attacks on temples and synagogues became rather frequent, as is demonstrated by archaeological excavations, but above all by the legislation of these decades.13 as to pagan temples, the case of the marneion has already been mentioned. in northern Palestine a church had been built on the foundations of the temple at Dora;14 the roman temple of Qedesh15 in Phoenicia, just north of the border of the province Palaestina secunda, seems to have been destroyed in the earthquake of 363, whereas in Paneas (Caesarea Philippi) pagan sanctuaries seem to have been frequented at least up to the fifth century in spite of the presence of a Christian community.16 Thus Barsauma and his men could attack temples only outside of Palestine proper, in Phoenicia with numerous temples mainly in the region of heliopolis/Baalbek and in Transjordan, in Palaestina Tertia, where such an attack is described in detail. as to samaritan synagogues, there is no evidence of samaritan synagogues north of Caesarea; outside of samaria itself (excavated in recent decades mainly by Yitzhaq magen),17 we have the archaeological evidence of a synagogue in sha’albim near ramla (the samaritan synagogue on the grounds of the ha-aretz museum in Tel aviv postdates our period). it may be assumed that the samaritans have been included in the triad of non-Christian groups without any concrete example. as to Jewish synagogues, they were expressly recognized as religious buildings (CTh 16.8.2, probably dated 373, forbids quartering soldiers in synagogues). But from 393 onward, laws protecting synagogues became necessary. The destruction of the synagogue of Callinicum on the euphrates in 388 caused a stir throughout 13. as to synagogues in Palestine, the archaeological evidence is very scanty and problematic. The laws issued after Julian protecting synagogues are directed above all to illyria; none is specifically concerned with Palestine. 14. Claudine Dauphin, “Dora-Dor: a station for Pilgrims in the Byzantine Period on Their Way to Jerusalem,” in Ancient Churches Revealed, ed. Yoram Tsafrir (Jerusalem: israel exploration society, 1993), 90–97. 15. mordechai aviam, Jews, Pagans and Christians in the Galilee: 25 Years of Archaeological Excavations and Surveys; Hellenistic to Byzantine Periods, land of galilee 1 (rochester, nY: University of rochester Press, 2004), 139–46. 16. Zvi Uri ma’oz, Baniyas, the Roman Temples, archaostyle scientific research series 8 (Qazrin: archaostyle, 2009), 41–42; ma’oz, “Banias,” NEAEHL 5 (2008): 1587–90. 17. Yitzhaq magen, “samaritan synagogues,” in Early Christianity in Context: Monuments and Documents, ed. frédéric manns and eugenio alliata, studium Biblicum franciscanum: Collectio maior 38. Jerusalem: franciscan Printing Press, 1993), 193–230.

80

Günter Stemberger

the empire, as did its rebuilding by order of the emperor at the expense of the Christian community, a measure against which ambrose, bishop of milan, violently protested (Ep. 40.6.18, Pl 16:1103f.). Codex Theodosianus 16.8.9, dated 29 september 393 and addressed to Count addeus, the supreme military commander of the eastern empire, clearly shows that this was not an isolated case: The Jewish religion is not forbidden by law. That is sufficiently clear. We are thus seriously concerned that in some places their meetings have been forbidden. Your sublime greatness is to curb with suitable severity, on receipt of this order, the atrocities of those who take forbidden liberties under the cloak of Christian religion and attempt to destroy and plunder synagogues.

This law appears to have been effective in the eastern empire. not so in the West, where a new law was necessary four years later. in Codex Theodosianus 16.8.12, dated 17 June 397, arcadius addressed the praefectus praetorio of illyria: The governors are responsible for protecting Jews from attack and that “they remain in their synagogues in their accustomed peace.” on 26 July 412, honorius issued a similar law at ravenna (CTh 16.8.20), addressed to the praefectus praetorio John. Codex Theodosianus 16.8.21, dated 6 august 420, is again addressed to the praefectus praetorio of illyria: “Their synagogues and houses may not be burned down anywhere, nor wrongly damaged without any reason.” These laws clearly react to attacks in illyria against Jews, their belongings, and their places of worship. Directly relevant in our context are three laws issued in the year 423, all addressed to the praefectus praetorio asclepiodotus, the uncle of empress eudocia, so important in our Life. Codex Theodosianus 16.8.25, dated 15 february, says: from now on, no synagogues of the Jews whatsoever may be simply taken away or burned down. and if, after publication of the law [i.e., CTh 16.8.9 of 393] synagogues have been again forcibly dispossessed or claimed for churches or in any case sanctified for the holy mysteries, they are to be given sites on which they may build, according to the size of those which have been taken away. . . . no further synagogues may be built, but the old may remain in their present form.

There is no mention of compensation for synagogues that have been burned down; where synagogues have been consecrated as churches, only a corresponding piece of land is to be offered in replacement. The final sentence forbids the building of new synagogues, unless these are simply to replace synagogues that have been taken away or burned down by Christians. Codex Theodosianus 16.8.26, dated 9 april of the same year, was published after Jewish intervention: our own and earlier decrees are known and published to all, by which we have set limits to the audacity of the detestable pagans, Jews and heretics. however, we are glad to take the opportunity to repeat the law, and wish the Jews to know: at their pitiable request we have decreed that those who, under the cloak of venerable Christianity,

Barsauma’s Travels to the Holy Land and Jewish History

81

carelessly permit many things, shall cease to insult and persecute them, so that now and in the future no one may occupy their synagogues and no one set fire to them.

in Codex Theodosianus 16.8.27, dated 8 June 423, Theodosius again returns to the subject: no new synagogues may be built, but the Jews “should not have to fear that the old ones will be taken away from them.” This series of three laws within the single year 423 and all directed to asclepiodotus, residing in antioch and responsible for the eastern part of the empire, evidently points to a rapid worsening of the situation for the Jews and their synagogues in the east. The question remains whether these laws reacted to events in syria or whether they also affected synagogues in Palestine. The excavations to date seem to prove the contrary. The claim that the activities of Barsauma and his monks are behind these three laws of 423, and that, consequently, Barsauma’s second journey to Palestine must have occurred directly before,18 is a mere hypothesis. There is not a single example of the transformation of a synagogue into a church in Palestine. an exception, but outside our period and area, is gerasa, where in 530 a church was built over a synagogue of the fourth or fifth century.19 Deliberate destruction of a synagogue by hostile forces can nowhere be demonstrated in Palestine in this period. according to the excavators, the village of sumaqa on the southern side of mount Carmel was destroyed during the fourth or at the beginning of the fifth century. its synagogue was severely damaged, but rebuilt in the fifth century and then used into the seventh century: it is possible that this was a local event that left no trace in the written sources. it may have been connected with attacks by fanatic Christians against Jewish and samaritan synagogues that happened in this period in the eastern provinces of the Byzantine empire, like those launched by Barsauma and his monks, or others that were recorded in the Codex Theodosianus. (XVi.8,9.12.20.21.25,26)20

18. françois nau, “Deux épisodes de l’histoire juive sous Théodose ii (423 et 438) d’après la Vie de Barsauma le syrien,” Revue des Études Juives 83–84 (1927): 192–93. 19. estée Dvorjetski, “The synagogue-Church at gerasa in Jordan: a Contribution to the study of ancient synagogues,” Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 121 (2005): 140–67. 20. shimon Dar, “sumaqa, h.orvat,” NEAEHL 4 (1993): 1412–15; see also the update in vol. 5; Dar, Sumaqa, a Roman-Byzantine Jewish Village, Bar international series 815 (oxford: archaeoPress, 1999). not quite so cautious is sivan, Palestine, 176–77: “it is impossible to establish with complete certainty the identity of the agents of destruction of sumaqa’s Jewish sanctuary and property. it is possible, however, to link the early fifth-century layer of demolition with the modus operandi of Barsauma, a mesopotamian monk whose meandering through the region invariably involved attacks on sacred precincts of non-Christians. . . . if indeed sumaqa’s Jewish synagogue and homes fell victim to Barsauma’s fanaticism, the detected destruction provides a sample of his methods vis-à-vis Jews, pagans, and samaritans.”

82

Günter Stemberger

The excavators themselves lament the uncertainty of the entire reconstruction of the building’s history, so that the reason for (and date of) its destruction must remain an open question. The situation was different in the diaspora. rachel hachlili enumerates a considerable number of synagogues that were destroyed or converted into churches from the late fourth century onward throughout the diaspora. she mentions apamea, elche, leptis magna, and stobi (and also gerasa in Jordan), where synagogues were found beneath churches.21 We might add the synagogue of saranda in present-day albania, excavated only recently underneath the Byzantine cathedral.22 in our context the synagogue of apamea is the most significant contemporary example; it has been studied in great detail by Beat Brenk.23 he also gives a list of churches built on the remains of former synagogues and of literary evidence— especially a synagogue destroyed by rabbula of edessa, and another by the syrian monk sergius.24 The somewhat earlier case of Callinicum has already been mentioned. We might add the frequently quoted case of the conversion of the synagogue above the tomb of the seven maccabean brothers and their mother in antiochia. The case is extremely problematic (John Chrysostom does not know of it, nor is a synagogue above a tomb conceivable).25 But it seems clear that Christian 21. rachel hachlili, Ancient Jewish Art and Archaeology in the Diaspora, handbuch der orientalistik, erste abteilung, Der nahe und mittlere osten 35 (leiden: Brill, 1998), 92–93, limiting herself to the archaeological documentation. see also lee i. levine, Visual Judaism in Late Antiquity: Historical Contexts of Jewish Art (new haven: Yale University Press, 2012, 181–82 on destructions and conversions of synagogues. he rightly emphasizes that the Life of Barsauma is the only report of such violence against Jews in Palestine. 22. ehud netzer and gideon foerster, “The synagogue at saranda, albania,” Qadmoniot 38 (2005): 45–53 (the earliest mosaics, second to third century, belonged to the bath of a roman villa; in the fourth century, the site seems to have been used for a synagogue when a large mosaic menorah decorated the floor, and finally in the fifth to sixth century it became a church; the chronology is based on the sequence of the mosaic floors); etleva nallbani, “la synagogue antique d’anchiasmos à saranda, en albanie,” in L’archéologie du judaïsme en France et en Europe, ed. Paul salmona and laurence sigal (Paris: Découverte, 2011), 63–73 (non vidi). 23. Beat Brenk, “Die Umwandlung der synagoge von apamea in eine Kirche: eine mentalitätsgeschichtliche studie,” in Tesserae: Festschrift für Josef Engemann, ed. ernst Dassmann and Klaus Thraede, Jahrbuch für antike und Christentum, ergänzungsband 18 (münster: aschendorff, 1991), 17, based on nau: “es ist naheliegend zu folgern, daß diese aktivitäten Barsaumas und vielleicht auch die Zerstörung der synagoge von apamea zu dem kaiserlichen erlaß vom Jahre 423 geführt haben, wonach den Juden für zerstörte synagogen eine grundstückentschädigung geboten werden sollte” (he refers to CTh 16.8.25; Brenk, “Die Umwandlung,” 17–24 on further destructions of synagogues and the role of syrian monks). 24. Brenk, “Die Umwandlung,” 12–14. 25. leonard V. rutgers, Making Myths: Jews in Early Christian Identity Formation (leuven: Peeters, 2009), 19–48 (“The example of antioch’s maccabean martyrs”), denies the presence of the tomb of the

Barsauma’s Travels to the Holy Land and Jewish History

83

aggression against Jews and their synagogues was not unusual in this period, especially in syria, a particular hot spot in this regard in these decades, although not every example withstands historical scrutiny. T h e sY nag o g U e o f r a B BaT m oa B

The only synagogue that is mentioned by name and whose destruction is described in great detail in the context of Barsauma’s second journey to the holy land, dated by nau to the years 419–422, is that of rabbat moab,26 identified by eusebius in his Onomasticon as Areopolis tēs Arabias, situated on the Via nova Trajana, a little more than 100 km south of amman, the ancient rabbat ammon. at the time of Barsauma’s visit, the city was no longer part of the Provincia arabia, but of the new province Palaestina Tertia, which reached north as far as the river arnon. areopolis and Petra are mentioned by sozomen (Hist. eccl. 7.15.11) among the cities in the east that under Theodosius i still maintained their hellenistic temples. The roman temple of areopolis might reinforce this statement, unless it was already destroyed earlier in the earthquake of 363.27 Life § 38.1 speaks of “a Jewish synagogue unequaled by any ever built, with the sole exception of the temple which King solomon built in Jerusalem,” and continues to describe it as follows (§ 38.2):

maccabean martyrs in the former synagogue. lothar Triebel, “Die angebliche synagoge der makkabäischen märtyrer in antiochia am orontes,” Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum 9 (2006): 464–95 convincingly refutes the claim that there ever was a synagogue underneath this church. levine, Visual Judaism, 200 n. 103, nevertheless still holds up the thesis of a maccabean synagogue converted into a church. as to the literary topos of synagogue conversion with special emphasis on north africa, see shira l. lander, “inventing synagogue Conversion: The Case of late roman north africa,” Journal of Ancient Judaism 4 (2013): 401–16. according to lander, “The Christian rhetoric of architectural ‘conversion’ is better understood as a form of competition-inspired polemic rather than a simple account of the physical record” (402), since it occurs even where, as in Tipasa, “no archaeological trace of Jewish presence has been found” (414). “The so-called ‘conversion’ of ancient synagogues into churches belongs to a complex and evolving fabric that weaves together a fifth-century Christian rhetoric of power with sixth-century imperial colonialist strategy” (416). This conclusion might also be applied to the claimed destruction of synagogues in the Life of Barsauma. 26. götz schmitt, Siedlungen Palästinas in griechisch-römischer Zeit: Ostjordanland, Negeb und (in Auswahl) Westjordanland (Wiesbaden: reichert, 1995), 287; robert schick, The Christian Communities of Palestine from Byzantine to Islamic Rule: A Historical and Archaeological Study, studies in late antiquity and early islam 2 (Princeton, nJ: Darwin Press, 1995), 434–35 does not mention any synagogal remains in areopolis. 27. Jerome, Comm. in Esaiam V on isa. 15.1 (CCsl 73, 176): “audiui quemdam areopolitem, sed et omnis ciuitas testis est, motu terrae magno in mea infantia, quando totius orbis litus transgressa sunt maria, eadem nocte muros urbis istius corruisse.”

84

Günter Stemberger This synagogue was built of great hewn stones, and its walls and floor were clad in bronze; it was richly decorated with gold and silver and in all its doorways hung little golden bells; an outer wall of siege-proof stone with great gates of iron surrounded it, and strong doors of bronze closed the house of prayer (syriac: hayklo) within.

as the author of the Life sees it, this building is comparable only to solomon’s temple; this is underlined by the enumeration of all the treasures within it: “now there was inside the temple a golden ark, a golden table, a ceremonial candlestick, golden torches, and golden lamps hanging on chains” (§ 42.1; cf. exodus 25). Whereas the temple no longer existed, and its only point of interest for Barsauma’s monks was now the pinnacle where satan confronted Jesus (§ 91.7), the Jews had supposedly built a kind of exact replica in the land of moab, inhabited by the descendants of lot and his daughters who are not allowed to enter the Jewish community (see Deuteronomy 23:4 and the rabbinic discussion in mishnah Yadayim 4:4 and later sources). This polemical aspect of the account seems conscious, but does it exclude an historical kernel? françois nau suggests that this destroyed synagogue may even be archaeologically attested: “le parvis de la synagogue est peut-être ce que m. de saulcy a pris pour le parvis d’un temple et dont une pierre est conservée au louvre, dans la salle des antiquités judaïques.”28 This stone, listed in rené Dussaud’s catalogue,29 is the only reference to Jews in rabbat moab prior to nau’s publication of parts of the syriac Life; “it was found in the sector south of the roman temple, where according to the typology of the surviving remains, a synagogue could have stood.”30 The stone is described by Jacqueline gysens as “maybe a fragment of a window frame.”31 since no particular characteristic of the stone is mentioned (e.g., a menorah), i do not know how one could tell its Jewish origin. nor do i know how “the typology of the surviving remains” helps to identify the remains of a synagogue—if there are no inscriptions and no specifically Jewish symbols, it is impossible to distinguish the remains of a Byzantine synagogue from those of a church. in a tourist guide one finds the information that the apsidal building right beside the rather well-preserved roman temple, dedicated to Diocletian and maximian according to the inscriptions on both sides of the entrance, might belong to 28. françois nau, “sur la synagogue de rabbat moab (422) et un mouvement sioniste favorisé par l’impératrice eudocie (438), d’après la vie de Barsauma le syrien,” Journal Asiatique 210 (1927): 192; nau, “Deux épisodes,” 194–99. 29. rené Dussaud, Musée du Louvre: Département des Antiques Orientales; Les monuments palestiniens et judaïques (Moab, Judée, Philistie, Samarie, Galilée (Paris: e. leroux, 1912), 22 (non vidi). 30. Jacqueline Calzini gysens, “Change and Continuity in Urban settlement Patterns in Palaestina Tertia: The Case of Christian areopolis (rabba, Jordan),” Aram 15 (2003): 5–6; there also the reference to Dussaud’s catalogue. 31. gysens, “Change and Continuity,” 5.

Barsauma’s Travels to the Holy Land and Jewish History

85

a synagogue, perhaps that destroyed by Barsauma.32 But apses are common to churches and synagogues of the period; in the case of rabbat moab both still visible apses clearly belong to churches; only an excavation could perhaps tell whether one of them was built over an earlier synagogue.33 an expedition of the istituto italiano per l’africa e l’oriente under the auspices of the Department of antiquities of Jordan started the “rabbathmoab and Qasr rabba Project” in 1999;34 it might help to confirm or reject the identification of these ruins with a synagogue. it will be extremely difficult, however, because the large, modern village is built on top of the ruins, using the ancient remains as building materials. Does the Life (§ 42.2) not suggest that there was nothing left of the synagogue? The fire “consumed the wooden beams, the stones, the bronze, the iron, the gold, the silver, the valuable garments, the precious stones, and everything which was to be found there. The fire worked its way down to the foundations and utterly destroyed the naos.” even the gold taken away by the thief “was swallowed up in front of his very eyes and was nowhere to be found” (§ 43.2). The synagogue just disappeared, leaving no trace that might help to verify the story of the destruction. Contrary to the destroyed temple of Jerusalem, whose ruins still served Christian propaganda, its counterpart in moab no longer had any function; its complete disappearance equaled the wished-for complete disappearance of the Jews. But no even roughly contemporaneous information about Jews in this region exists. an argument from silence is, of course, always problematic. it is not uncommon that excavations of synagogues are the only evidence we have for a Jewish community in a particular place or region in the Byzantine period. The archive of Babatha, a Jewish woman from mah. oza in the district of Zoara near the south end of the Dead sea, documents her visit to rabbat moab (en Rabbathmōbois polei) 32. robert Boulanger, Guides bleus—Jordanie (Paris: hachette, 1979), 154: “Tout à côté [du temple romain], un monument absidial en ruine, orienté vers l’o., a pu être une synagogue; d’après le récit hagiographique consacré à Barsauma le syrien, rédigé au Vie s., ce moine aurait détruit une synagogue en ce lieu.” This information is most probably based, directly or indirectly, on f. nau. 33. anne michel, Les églises d’époques byzantine et umayyade de Jordanie (provinces d’Arabie et de Palestine): Ve—VIIIe siècle; Typologie architecturale et aménagements liturgiques (avec catalogue des monuments), Bibliothèque de l’antiquité Tardive 2 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2001), 139 still speaks of only one church with an inscribed apse to which two greek inscriptions, documenting restorations of the church in the years 492 and 687, might belong: fawzi Zayadine, “Deux inscriptions grecques de rabbat moab (areopolis),” Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 16 (1971): 71–76. gysens, “Change and Continuity,” 7 mentions the unusual orientation of “Church 1” south of the roman temple, which r. Canova (as quoted by gysens) already in 1936 interpreted “as the adaptation of a pre-existing roman period monument.” The same site was considered by nau as a possible localization of the synagogue destroyed by Barsauma. Brenk, “Die Umwandlung,” 17 does not explicitly claim that the synagogue of rabbat moab had been converted into a church; he speaks simply of a “synagogenverbrennung,” but by placing this example between other conversions of synagogues into churches he implies it for rabbat moab as well. 34. gysens, “Change and Continuity,” 1.

86

Günter Stemberger

together with her husband in December 127 for the registration of the land she owned. four years later, in July 131, she was summoned to court in rabbat moab in a dispute about some properties.35 The provincial capital was Petra, but the roman governor came to rabbat moab every summer for official activities. rabbat moab was closer to mah. oza than Petra (ca. 75 km by road) and thus a natural choice.36 The Jewish community of Zoara still thrived in the time of Barsauma, as we know from the many dated Jewish tombstones discovered there, and thus it would not be impossible that Jews at that time also lived in rabbat moab, although—apart from the Life of Barsauma—we do not have any evidence for this.37 The only archaeological evidence for the conversion of a synagogue into a church in this region comes from gerasa, whose Jewish inhabitants are mentioned several times by Josephus in the context of the great revolt against rome. That a Jewish community existed in gerasa even centuries later is documented only by the synagogue of the fifth century. its mosaic floor (below that of the later church) depicts animals entering noah’s ark and contains an aramaic (or hebrew) inscription with the names of three benefactors of the synagogue;38 another inscription in greek names it the most holy place and wishes peace to its community (synagōgē).39 The building of the church above it is dated by an inscription to the year 530/1. it is generally assumed that the synagogue had been destroyed before by Christians, although i do not know of any evidence for this. gerasa lies more than 150 km north of rabbat moab; it is the southernmost Jewish settlement east of the Jordan in the Byzantine period of which we know.40 all other excavated synagogues are to the north of it, in the northern part of the golan. 35. The documents are P. Yadin 16 and 25: The Documents from the Bar Kokhba Period in the Cave of Letters: Greek Papyri, Aramaic, and Nabatean Signatures and Subscriptions, ed. Yigael Yadin, Judean Desert studies 2 (Jerusalem: israel exploration society, 1989), 66–68, 108–11. 36. see Benjamin h. isaac, The Limits of Empire: The Roman Army in the East (oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992), 125. 37. see sacha stern, “The Jewish aramaic Tombstones from Zoar,” Journal of Jewish Studies 68 (2017): 158–79 with references to earlier literature. CTh 16.8.29, dated 30 may 429, states that “the leaders of the Jews (primates) who are appointed in the sanhedrins of the two Palestines, or dwell in other provinces” have to deliver a yearly fixed sum, “equivalent to what the patriarchs once demanded under the title of crown money,” to the treasury. The omission of the Palaestina Tertia (to which rabbat moab belonged) may point to the fact that no sizable Jewish communities existed there. 38. Joseph naveh, On Stone and Mosaic: The Aramaic and Hebrew Inscriptions from Ancient Synagogues (Jerusalem: sifriat ma’ariv, 1978), 86. 39. lea roth-gerson, The Greek Inscriptions from the Synagogues in Eretz-Israel (Jerusalem: Yad Ben Zvi, 1987), 46–50; shimon applebaum and arthur segal, “gerasa,” NEAEHL 2 (1993): 470–79. 40. livias, southeast of Jericho on the other side of the Jordan, would be closer to rabbat moab. sivan, Palestine, 58, writes that traveling from the sinai to Jerusalem by the Via Trajana, the “first Jewish settlements along this road were livias and naaran” (north of Jericho), but concedes that “the presence of Jews [in livias] is not indicated in any contemporary source” (62).

Barsauma’s Travels to the Holy Land and Jewish History

87

since we have no evidence as to the existence of a Jewish community and a synagogue at rabbat moab, in this period or at any other time in late antiquity, it may be suggested that the Life transfers events known from contemporary syria to Palaestina Tertia and attributes them to Barsauma, the great hero in his fight against pagans and samaritans, but especially against Jews. The choice of rabbat moab might have been conscious: the temple of Jerusalem lies in ruins and is described as haunted by demons (as becomes clear in Barsauma’s last confrontation in Jerusalem); its symbolic replacement is at the outer limits of Palestine, but even there it cannot survive, but has to be destroyed. as michael gaddis has suggested, the Life of Barsauma presents its hero in the likeness of the biblical figure of Joshua, with a close parallel in the story about the destruction of the marneion in gaza.41 as Bishop Porphyrius threatened with a ban (ἀναθεματίσας) all Christians who would take anything of the treasures in the marneion (Life of Porphyrius 66), Barsauma tells his monks before destroying the synagogue: “The curse of the living god on anyone who takes any object, however small, from this synagogue! let this temple and all that is in it be fed to the fire!” (§ 42.1).42 in gaza, the roman soldiers and other people who did not belong to the community quite openly looted the temple, whereas in rabbat moab a single man disobeyed the order and cut off the golden bells of the curtain in the synagogue, but was discovered and expelled from the company; his booty miraculously disappeared (§§ 42.3–43.2). only here the thief is explicitly compared to achan (§ 42.5–6), the man who under Joshua had taken part of the booty and was therefore stoned to death (Joshua 7:10– 26). The same biblical example might have stood behind the Life of Porphyrius, although Deuteronomy 7:25 is closer: “The images of their gods you shall burn with fire. Do not covet the silver or the gold that is on them and take it for yourself, because you could be ensnared by it; for it is abhorrent to the lord your god.” one might also point to the close resemblance of the destruction of the synagogue as described here with that of the marneion. in gaza a small boy speaks out in the name of Christ in greek (although he did not know the language) that the temple must be fully destroyed by fire down to its very foundations, and even gives instructions how the fire would be most destructive; then the place must be

41. michael gaddis, There Is No Crime for Those Who Have Christ: Religious Violence in the Christian Roman Empire, Transformation of the Classical heritage 39 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005), 188–89 and n. 145. Barsauma and his monks follow the biblical model of “the army of Joshua in the land of the Canaanites. The new ‘Canaanites’ were the Jews, samaritans, and pagans who occupied the Christian holy land, and Barsauma and his followers destroyed their temples and synagogues wherever they found them,” gaddis, There Is No Crime, 246. 42. for other examples of this topos (minorca, amida), see Paul C. Dilley, “The invention of Christian Tradition: ‘apocrypha’, imperial Policy, and anti-Jewish Propaganda,” Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 50 (2010): 612.

88

Günter Stemberger

purified before a church may be built there.43 a similar description is found in the Life of Barsauma § 42.2: Barsauma’s disciples had brought with them naphtha and sulfur. These they made into a number of balls which they hurled at the walls and at the ceiling of the building. . . . The fire worked its way down to the foundations of the temple and utterly destroyed the naos.

This is not to claim that the author of the Life of Barsauma knew the syriac text of the Life of Porphyrius and consciously adapted part of that narrative for his own purpose. important is only the fact that both texts draw on comparable biblical models and literary patterns when describing the destruction of non-Christian cult places. The episode of the Jews coming under eudocia to Jerusalem (§ 91) seems to be a projection of the events in the time of Julian, the permission to rebuild the temple and the reaction of the Jews of the diaspora.44 similarly the Life projects the rebuilt temple onto rabbat moab. Time and space become interchangeable within the typological presentation of the Life. it is, of course, not impossible that a narrative patterned after earlier models uses them to describe historical facts. But in such a case these facts should be known from elsewhere or at least conform to what is known from other evidence. in the parts of the Life of Barsauma analyzed here, most details are contrary to whatever we know from archaeological or literary information. The description of the distribution of the religious communities in the land is not realistic; the travel routes taken by Barsauma are at the least very uncommon; and the description of the huge Jewish community and their magnificent temple in rabbat moab is not only enormously exaggerated—the whole story is located in a region where no Jewish community is documented and where no remains of a synagogue have ever been discovered. it is astonishing how this story could ever have been taken to contain a historical kernel. as long as no other evidence emerges, it must be taken for what it is: pure fiction.

43. Life of Porphyrius 66: Καύσατε τὸν ναὸν τὸν ἔνδον ἕως ἐδάφους. . . . Τοιούτῳ δὲ τρόπῳ καύσατε αὐτόν. Ἀγάγετε ὑγρὰν πίσσαν θεῖόν τε καὶ στέαρ χοίρεον καὶ μίξατε τὰ τρία καὶ χρίσατε τὰς χαλκᾶς θύρας καὶ ἐπ’ αὐτὰς τὸ πῦρ ἐπιβάλετε, καὶ οὕτως πᾶς ὁ ναὸς καίεται. 44. see, e.g., rufinus, Hist. eccl. 10.38 (gCs 9, 997).

4

Barsauma, eudocia, Jerusalem, and the Temple mount Jan Willem Drijvers

The city of Jerusalem is very much at the center of the Life of Barsauma. The wandering monk is said to have visited the city four times.1 on his first visit, which took place when he was still a child, Barsauma is alleged to have suffered considerably from the persecutions of pagans, Jews, and samaritans who were in the majority in the city while the Christians were still few in numbers. on his second journey to Jerusalem, which took place a considerable time after the first one, Barsauma was accompanied by forty companions. he and his companions are said to have demolished pagan temples, as well as samaritan and Jewish synagogues, including the synagogue at rabbat moab, whose destruction is discussed extensively by the

1. §§ 4, 32ff., 76–83, 89–96. The dating of his journeys, apart from the first one, has been associated by françois nau, “Deux épisodes de l’histoire juive sous Théodose ii (423 et 438) d’après la Vie de Barsauma le syrien,” Revue des Études Juives 83 (1927): passim with the issue of imperial laws. The laws protecting synagogues and temples issued in 423 (CTh 16.8.25 [15 february 423], 16.8.26 [9 april 423], and 16.8.27 [8 June 423]) are considered by nau and in his wake others a reaction to the destruction by Barsauma and his fanatical monks of temples and synagogues. Based on the dates of the laws and the syriac Life of Simeon Stylites 121–23 (tr. Doran, The Lives of Simeon Stylites, 189–91), this journey is supposed to have taken place in the years 419–422. nau dates Barsauma’s third and fourth visits to Jerusalem at the beginning of 438 and october of the same year. The fourth visit nau connects with the antiJewish third Novella of January 439 (NTh 3.1; amnon linder, The Jews in Roman Imperial Legislation [Detroit and Jerusalem: Wayne state University Press and The israel academy of sciences and humanities, 1987], 323ff.). however, as will be argued below, it is unlikely that the events described in the Life are historical, which makes dating these journeys by associating them with imperial laws a pointless undertaking. on Barsauma’s journeys, see also the contributions of stemberger and hahn in this volume.

89

90

Jan Willem Drijvers

author of the Life.2 although Barsauma had prepared his mind to go to and pray in Jerusalem, throughout the latter episode no visit to Jerusalem is recorded. Barsauma’s third and fourth voyages to Jerusalem, and the latter in particular, are of interest here because of his meetings with the empress eudocia, wife of Theodosius ii (408–450). on his third journey and second visit Barsauma advised the empress about the way to salvation. Barsauma undertook his fourth trip to Jerusalem on account of the empress’s decree giving the Jews permission to enter Jerusalem and granting them the opportunity to pray at the ruins of solomon’s Temple. The Jews considered this decree the end of their diaspora and invited all Jews to come to Jerusalem for the feast of Tabernacles because “our kingdom is going to be established in Jerusalem” (§ 91.4). about twenty companions of Barsauma, who did not show himself, went up to the ruins of the Temple, where “one hundred and three thousand men and women” were mourning (§ 91.9). soon after their arrival a frightening vision appeared to the Jews in which god’s armies were bearing down on them from heaven; subsequently, sand rose up like a cloud, covering the Jews, and many stones flew through that cloud, killing countless Jews. Barsauma’s companions were accused of killing the Jews, not only by the Jews themselves but also by the romans and the Christian clergy; the latter had sided with the Jews because eudocia had decreed that no one should harm the Jewish people. romans, clergy, and Jews went to eudocia, who was staying in Bethlehem, to accuse Barsauma’s companions. eighteen of them were arrested; and eudocia decreed that a judge should hear them and put them to death the following day. however, when it appeared that the bodies of the Jews did not show any wounds, and when a Jewish woman suddenly fell dead beside the corpses, the officers of eudocia began to doubt whether the Jews were killed by Barsauma’s companions. Then the Jewish priests came forward saying that they were victims of the wrath of god and that the companions were innocent. subsequently, the empress sent a message to the imprisoned Christians saying that they would be released. Then the prisoners revealed that Barsauma was their spiritual leader. When the empress was informed about this, she asked Barsauma not to harbor resentment toward her; she would send for the governor to release his companions. however, the many bishops, who happened to be present in Jerusalem, thought that eudocia still intended to help the Jews. They assembled a great many Christians in the city and its suburbs, who waited to see what decree the empress would issue. When the governor visited the prisoners and asked them to tell him how the incident on the Temple mount came about, Barsauma, who was also there, answered in their place. he had, however, hardly opened his mouth when an earthquake occurred that shook the city but did 2. §§ 38–45. see stemberger in this volume.

Barsauma, Eudocia, Jerusalem, and the Temple Mount

91

not do any damage thanks to the grace of god. after the governor, who had fallen down, was raised up by Barsauma, he ordered his heralds to proclaim that “the Crucified has overcome.” The Christians were joyful and delighted, but the Jews, samaritans, and pagans realized that they were defeated. eudocia showed her subservience to Barsauma, and when the latter left Jerusalem the following day he was escorted out of the city by the entire population. Barsauma’s last visit to Jerusalem is very elaborately described in the Life and makes up some 10 percent of the text. it is one of the best-known parts of the text thanks to the publication of an excerpt by françois nau in 1927,3 and is regularly referred to in scholarly literature. The episode is representative of the Life of Barsauma as a whole: it contains (violent) confrontations between Christians and non-Christians, in this case the Jews; it has miracles that attest to god’s support for Barsauma and his companions; Christianity is triumphant, and Judaism is defeated; and the secular authorities—that is, eudocia—have to recognize the power of Christianity and the Christian god represented by Barsauma. The aim of this study is twofold. firstly, i intend to assess the role of eudocia in the story. The Life is the only source for eudocia’s pro-Jewish stance and for her involvement in the Jewish coup d’état. Did she indeed give the Jews access again to Jerusalem and allow them to pray at the site of the Temple, from which the Jews concluded that Jerusalem was returned to them, as the Life informs us? i will argue that this episode is a literary construct that has no relation to actual historical events. secondly, i intend to offer a better understanding of the character of the text by establishing the tradition within syriac literature to which the Life may have belonged. But first i offer a survey of eudocia’s sojourns in Jerusalem. e U D o C ia a n D J e rU s a l e m

imperial engagement with the holy land seems to have stopped after the reign of Constantine the great (306–337). The latter was responsible for the building of churches in Jerusalem, Bethlehem, and mamre. also, his mother helena visited the holy land and is supposed to have found the holy Cross in Jerusalem. it was not until the reign of eudocia’s husband, Theodosius ii, that serious imperial engagement with Jerusalem and a growing connection between the imperial court and the holy land were once again in evidence. around the year 427 Theodosius sent money to the bishop of Jerusalem for distribution among the needy, as well as a golden cross set with precious stones to be erected on golgotha.4 in exchange for

3. françois nau, “résumé de monographies syriaques”; see also nau, “Deux episodes de l’histoire juive,” 196–99. 4. Theophanes, Chron. am 5920.

92

Jan Willem Drijvers

this imperial munificence, the bishop of Jerusalem donated relics of the protomartyr stephen, whose remains had been discovered in 415 just outside of Jerusalem,5 to the imperial court. a firm connection between the holy land and the imperial court would be established during the two sojourns of eudocia in the holy land.6 eudocia’s first stay in Jerusalem is associated with the visit of melania the Younger to Constantinople; she visited the imperial city in the winter of 436–437 on an official mission in connection with the marriage of eudoxia, the daughter of Theodosius and eudocia, to the Western emperor Valentinian iii. melania was leader of the monastery on the mount of olives. she seems to have convinced the emperor to send his wife, eudocia, on a mission to the holy land.7 The empress, who had become well acquainted with melania and came to consider her as her “spiritual mother,” had decided to visit the holy sites in Palestine as a public expression of thanksgiving for the marriage of her daughter. eudocia departed Constantinople for the holy places possibly early in 438.8 her pilgrimage calls to mind helena’s journey more than a hundred years earlier. like that of helena, eudocia’s itinerary was a combination of public performance and personal enthusiasm; it was an official venture sanctioned by the court as well as a personal religious mission.9 in Jerusalem she was accompanied by Cyril, bishop of alexandria.10 Yet, Juvenal, bishop of Jerusalem, must have known how to profit from the presence of the empress. he may have secured the empress’s patronage for a new shrine for saint stephen at the north gate of the city, allegedly at the spot where the protomartyr was stoned to death by the Jews.11 in Jerusalem the empress met Barsauma for the first time according to the Life. When eudocia was informed that Barsauma was in Jerusalem she sent him a great quantity of gold, which he refused to accept. Then the empress invited him to see her, and when eudocia asked him to show her the way to salvation, Barsauma answered that she should pay for her sins with almsgiving and mercy for the weak. for the rest of her life eudocia gave

5. edward D. hunt, Holy Land Pilgrimage in the Later Roman Empire, AD 312–460 (oxford: oxford University Press, 1982), 214–15. 6. for a discussion of eudocia’s sojourns in the holy land, see, e.g., hunt, Holy Land Pilgrimage, ch. 10; Kenneth g. holum, Theodosian Empresses: Women and Imperial Dominion in Late Antiquity, Transformation of the Classical heritage 3 (Berkeley, los angeles, and london: University of California Press, 1982), 184ff.; anja Busch, Die Frauen der theodosianischen Dynastie: Macht und Repräsentation kaiserlicher Frauen im 5. Jahrhundert (stuttgart: steiner, 2015), 151–65. 7. gerontius, Vita Melaniae 56 (ed. gorce). 8. hunt, Holy Land Pilgrimage, 222. 9. on helena and her journey to the holy land, see Jan Willem Drijvers, Helena Augusta: The Mother of Constantine the Great and the Legend of Her Finding of the True Cross, Brill’s studies in intellectual history 27 (leiden: Brill, 1992), 137–43. 10. Cyril, Ep. 70; hunt, Holy Land Pilgrimage, 230. 11. Vita Petr. Hib. 37; acts 8:57–58.

Barsauma, Eudocia, Jerusalem, and the Temple Mount

93

many charitable gifts to the poor. she begged Barsauma for his cloak, which he gave to her and wrapped around her as a blessing. in return the empress sent the monk a valuable veil, which he reluctantly accepted and adapted to the service of god’s altar (§ 83). eudocia probably returned to Constantinople in the summer of 439,12 carrying with her relics of saint stephen presumably given to her by the bishop of Jerusalem to deposit in the church of st. lawrence in the eastern capital. her stay in the imperial city would last only a few years. The sources are vague about her return to Jerusalem, but court politics, shifting balances of power, alleged adultery, and controversies between herself and her sister-in-law Pulcheria are often mentioned as reasons for eudocia’s final retreat from Constantinople and her permanent settlement in Palestine—probably late in 441 or early in 442.13 eudocia seems not have been divested of her imperial status and retained possession of her wealth. During her second stay in Jerusalem the empress developed into a veritable benefactress of the city, contributing considerably to the Christianization of the city’s landscape and reshaping its space.14 her building activities in Jerusalem were the first constructions on a large scale since Constantine.15 she is said to have contributed to the building of churches, monasteries, hostels for pilgrims and the sick, a residence for Jerusalem’s bishop, and a hospital; she donated funds for the lighting of the anastasis, which contained Christ’s tomb, and presented the monks of that shrine with an annual revenue. in particular, the fortification of the city and its expansion to the south, as well as the construction of a new and magnificent ecclesiastical complex in honor of saint stephen—probably a replacement of the sanctuary consecrated in 438—outside the city walls on the road northward to Damascus, are mentioned in the sources.16 The church for saint stephen was inaugurated 12. hunt, Holy Land Pilgrimage, 234. 13. hunt, Holy Land Pilgrimage, 235–36; holum, Theodosian Empresses, 218; Busch, Die Frauen der theodosianischen Dynastie, 162 (“Beginn der 440er Jahre”). her retreat is often considered an exile, but cf. lenski, “empresses in the holy land: The Creation of a Christian Utopia in late antique Palestine,” in Travel, Communication, and Geography in Late Antiquity: Sacred and Profane, ed. linda ellis and frank l. Kidner (aldershot: ashgate, 2004),” 118 who considers eudocia’s retreat to the holy land as an opportunity for dealing with the crisis of imperial estrangement and for creating her own authority as an important political figure independent of the imperial court. 14. according to nicephorus Callistus (Hist. eccl. 14.50 = Pg 146:1240) she spent 20.840 lb. of gold for her building activities; cf. hunt, Holy Land Pilgrimage, 239. 15. e.g., Konstantin m. Klein, “The Politics of holy space: Jerusalem in the Theodosian era (379– 457 Ce),” in Locating the Middle Ages: The Space and Places of Medieval Culture, ed. Julian Weiss and sarah salih, Kings College london medieval studies 22 (london: King’s College london, Centre for late antique & medieval studies, 2012), 95–107; Klein, “ ‘Do Good in thy Pleasure unto Zion’: The Patronage of aelia eudokia in Jerusalem,” in Female Founders in Byzantium and Beyond, ed. lioba Theis et al., Wiener Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 60/61 (Vienna: Böhlau, 2011/2012), 85–95. 16. hunt, Holy Land Pilgrimage, 239–43.

94

Jan Willem Drijvers

in 460 and is said to have rivaled Constantine’s Church of the holy sepulchre. eudocia died in Jerusalem on 20 october 460.17 she was buried in st. stephen’s church.18 according to the Life, eudocia and Barsauma were in contact again early during her second stay in Jerusalem.19 h i s T o r iC a l V e r i si m i l i T U D e ?

The Life is the only source that reports eudocia’s favoring of the Jews and provides information about the encounters and communication between Barsauma and the empress. other sources available for reconstructing eudocia’s sojourns in the holy land, such as the fifth-century ecclesiastical historians, gerontius’s Life of Melania, the Life of Peter the Iberian, and the Byzantine chronicles, while reporting extensively about her activities in Jerusalem are silent about her decision to give the Jews access to Jerusalem and the Temple mount. They are also completely reticent about Barsauma.20 These omissions make the Life a unique document for understanding the relationship between Barsauma and eudocia and her support of the Jews and role in the events on Temple mount.21 But this raises the question as to how far we can trust the Life as a source for historical information. many scholars, beginning with françois nau, have accepted the information provided by the Life as historically reliable. in his wake several modern scholars, who used nau’s excerpts of the Life, as published in his “résumé de monographies syriaques,” for drawing conclusions about eudocia’s activities in the holy land with regard to the Jews, have done the same.22 some even go as far as to argue that 17. holum, Theodosian Empresses, 224. 18. Cyril scyth. Vita Euthym. 35. 19. Busch, Die Frauen der theodosianischen Dynastie, 153 dates eudocia’s second meeting with Barsauma at the end of her first stay in Jerusalem. 20. historical information about Barsauma is scanty; see the introduction to this volume and menze, “The Dark side of holiness: Barsauma the ‘roasted’ and the invention of a Jewish Jerusalem,” in Motions of Late Antiquity: Essays on Religion, Politics, and Society in Honour of Peter Brown, ed. Jamie Kreiner and helmut reimitz, Cultural encounters in late antiquity and the middle ages 4 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2016), 232–35. 21. on eudocia’s stay in Jerusalem, the Jews and Barsauma, see also menze, “The Dark side of holiness.” 22. e.g., holum, Theodosian Empresses, 218: “The life of Barsauma . . . preserves an authentic glimpse, perhaps from eyewitnesses, of eudocia’s position in the holy land during the first years of her exile”; robert l. Wilken, The Land Called Holy: Palestine in Christian History and Thought (new haven and london: Yale University Press, 1992), 140: “eudocia is reported to have looked with favour on Jews residing in Jerusalem and on Jews praying at the ruins of the Temple;” hagith sivan, Palestine in Late Antiquity (oxford: oxford University Press, 2008), 215: “eudocia’s presence in Jerusalem . . . placed her in the centre of Jewish-Christian polemic over the Temple mount.” also Busch, Die Frauen der theodosianischen Dynastie, 153–54 does not seem to doubt the dependability of the information provided by the Life.

Barsauma, Eudocia, Jerusalem, and the Temple Mount

95

the empress had created a Zionist movement by granting the Jews permission to pray at the ruins of solomon’s Temple, thereby giving them the conviction that their kingdom would be restored in Jerusalem.23 The term “Zionist movement” (mouvement sioniste) is derived from nau, who first used it,24 but it is of course blatantly anachronistic. other scholars are skeptical and consider the historical value of the Life doubtful,25 or argue that only after a thorough analysis of the complete text of the Life in the context of syriac Christian literature can its historicity be established.26 as noted above, the Life is the only source that mentions contacts between Barsauma and eudocia and reports the empress’s involvement with the affairs on the Temple mount. all other sources are silent about this. moreover, they do not attest to any sympathy by the empress for the Jews and Judaism. it seems improbable that eudocia’s association with the events on the Temple mount and her connections with Barsauma would have been ignored by other authors of the time had they been historically genuine. from a historical point of view it is not easy to accept that the empress or the imperial court at Constantinople would have given the Jews access again to Jerusalem and the Temple mount.27 firstly, eudocia’s patronage in Jerusalem, as it can be reconstructed from historically reliable sources, was focused on advancing the Christianization of Jerusalem and the holy land and not on returning old rights to the Jews. in that respect she acted in accordance with expectations that her presence served to make manifest in a material way the Christian triumph over the past.28 giving the Jews access to the Temple mount would not have been in keeping with her Christian patronage. secondly, imperial laws from the year 423 indicate that although Jews and Judaism were still protected, and the burning and demolition of synagogues by Christian fanatics were forbidden, the Jews were not allowed to build new synagogues;

23. holum, Theodosian Empresses, 218. 24. nau, “Deux episodes de l’histoire juive,” 184; nau, “sur la synagogue de rabbat moab et un mouvement sioniste favorisé par l’impératrice eudocie (438), d’après la vie de Barsauma le syrien,” Journal Asiatique 210 (1927): 189–92. 25. lucas van rompay, “Barsawmo,” in Gorgias Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Syriac Heritage, ed. sebastian P. Brock et al. (Piscataway, nJ: gorgias Press, 2011), 59; gaddis, There Is No Crime, 153. 26. günter stemberger, Jews and Christians in the Holy Land: Palestine in the Fourth Century (edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000), 313; and stemberger in this volume. 27. since hadrian’s refoundation of the city in 135 Jews were banned from the city. This ban may have been renewed by Constantine; but see oded irshai, “Constantine and the Jews: The Prohibition against entering Jerusalem—history and hagiography,” Zion 60 (1995): 129–78. 28. as andrew s. Jacobs, The Remains of the Jews: The Holy Land and Christian Empire in Late Antiquity (stanford, Ca: stanford University Press, 2004), 157 argues convincingly, the empress was not to act impartially but “to defend zealously the pious Christians in their own city and to uphold the divine sanction against the Jews.”

96

Jan Willem Drijvers

however, existing synagogues that were demolished were permitted to be repaired.29 Novella 3 from 438 asserts the same but excludes Jews from service in the imperial administration and holding offices in municipal governments.30 These laws indicate, on the one hand, that the Jews and Judaism still enjoyed imperial protection, but, on the other hand, that Jews were also curtailed in their freedom to build new places of worship and in the pursuance of public offices.31 returning the Temple mount and the city of Jerusalem to the Jews was clearly not in accordance with the imperial policy as expressed in legislation, and therefore difficult to credit. Besides, it is unlikely that eudocia would have had the authority to make independent rulings, as the Life suggests, such as rescinding the imperial ban on the presence of Jews in Jerusalem without reference back to and the approval of the court in Constantinople.32 Thirdly, eudocia’s honoring of saint stephen, who is reported to have been stoned to death by Jews,33 may actually reflect an anti-Jewish stance by the empress. While reliable sources available for the reconstruction of eudocia’s life do not refer to her involvement with the Jews and the affairs on the Temple mount, the Life in its turn is completely silent about eudocia’s activities in Jerusalem and her Christianization of the city’s landscape as presented by these sources. The empress’s special interest in saint stephen, her association with melania the Younger, and her building activities in Jerusalem, which are elaborately reported in these sources, are omitted in the Life. it seems therefore unlikely that the author of the Life used these sources, if he was familiar with them, or was interested in them at all. he only seems to have seized the presence of eudocia in Jerusalem to create an anti-Jewish narrative by attributing Jewish sympathies to the empress, possibly motivated by the fact that the imperial authorities still protected Judaism and Jews to some extent, in order to add to the picture of Barsauma as the victorious hero who was fighting for the righteous Christian cause. eudocia’s involvement in the affairs on the Temple mount and her confrontation with Barsauma are therefore doubtful. instead, the episode seems to be a liter29. CTh 16.8.25 (15 february 423), 16.8.26 (9 april 423), and 16.8.27 (8 June 423). The laws are addressed to asclepiodotus, praetorian prefect of the east and the pagan uncle of eudocia. nau and others have the unlikely suggestion that the protection of the Jews was stimulated by asclepiodotus’s sympathizing with pagans and Jews; nau even goes so far as to argue that eudocia, who had just converted to Christianity because of her marriage to Theodosius ii in 421 but seemed to have remained religiously tolerant, was behind these laws. see also linder, The Jews in Roman Imperial Legislation, 287– 301; stemberger, Jews and Christians in the Holy Land, 154–58. 30. linder, The Jews in Roman Imperial Legislation, 306–9. 31. see also fergus millar, A Greek Roman Empire: Power and Belief under Theodosius II (408–450), sather Classical lectures 64 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2006), 123–29. 32. from § 89 it can be concluded that even the emperor Theodosius was surprised by eudocia’s decree. 33. acts 8:57–58.

Barsauma, Eudocia, Jerusalem, and the Temple Mount

97

ary construct aimed at enhancing the picture of Barsauma as a man fighting for a just Christian cause, rather than a historically trustworthy report. if the historical accuracy of the eudocia episode is doubtful, what does that mean for the Life as a whole? a possible answer to this question may be found in the role of Jerusalem and the Temple mount within the context of Christian syriac literature of the fifth and sixth centuries. in order to answer this question i will first briefly discuss the Temple mount as a contested holy space. The TemPle moUnT

The razing of the Temple in 70 c.e. and the remaining emptiness of the sacred space of the Temple mount were in Christian eyes a clear statement and visible proof of god’s disavowal of the Jews and the defeat of Judaism in favor of Christianity. When the emperor hadrian refounded the city as Colonia aelia Capitolina after the Bar Kokhba revolt (132–135), and the city became predominantly pagan, the Temple mount (some 20 percent of the city’s area) remained a desolate area within the urban landscape.34 also when the city rapidly turned into the spiritual center of the Christianizing roman empire, for which Constantine the great had laid the foundation in the 320s and 330s, the site of the Jewish temple remained conspicuously empty.35 for Christians the desolation of the Temple mount symbolized that god had left the Jews and that now Christianity was the Verus israel. The Jews were allowed to visit Jerusalem only once a year, to lament the destruction of the Temple at a pierced stone on the Temple mount, as we know from the Bordeaux pilgrim who visited Jerusalem in 333.36 Constantine’s most important building scheme in Jerusalem was the construction of the Church of the holy sepulchre on the site of golgotha and Christ’s tomb. although this church complex was in the first place constructed to commemorate Christ’s crucifixion, burial, and resurrection, it clearly interacted with the traditions of the Temple mount and can be seen as an architectural marker rivaling the demolished Jewish temple and a symbol of Christian victory over Judaism. it is not without meaning that eusebius names the church new Jerusalem.37 Concepts, images, and ideas formerly connected to the Temple now became associated with the Church of the holy

34. e.g., shlomit Weksler-Bdolah, “a Plan of Aelia Capitolina in the 4th C. a.D,” in Roman Jerusalem: A New Old City, ed. gideon avni and guy D. stiebels, Journal of roman archaeology, suppl. ser. 105 (Portsmouth, ri: Journal of roman archaeology, 2017), 7–10. 35. e.g., Jan Willem Drijvers, “Transformation of a City: The Christianization of Jerusalem in the fourth Century,” in Cults, Creeds, and Identities in the Greek City after the Classical Age, ed. richard alston et al. (louvain: Peeters, 2013), 309–29. 36. Itin. Burd. 592. 37. Vita Constantini 3.33.1.

98

Jan Willem Drijvers

sepulchre.38 as the pilgrim egeria, who stayed in Jerusalem in the years 382–385, informs us, on good friday the believers not only venerated and kissed the relic of the Cross but also the ring of King solomon as well as the horn with which solomon was anointed.39 in september the Christian community of Jerusalem celebrated the feast of the encaenia, which was originally the Jewish feast of the consecration of the Jewish temple by solomon, but now commemorated the consecration of the Constantinian church complex on golgotha.40 in the fourth century Christians in Jerusalem seem to have come under the impression that they had appropriated the Jewish temple by leaving its site abandoned and by transferring Temple traditions to the Church of the holy sepulchre. The attempt therefore by Julian the apostate in 363 to rebuild the Temple must have been a great blow to the Christian church, in particular if the restoration would have been successful.41 in spite of the failure of the restoration attempt in its very first phase Christians began to display an extraordinary sensitivity to the site of the Temple mount. This started with the vehement reactions by gregory of nazianzus and ephrem syrus against Julian’s favoring of the Jews and is also referred to by other church fathers and fifth-century church historians.42 The con38. e.g., heribert Busse and georg Kretschmar, Jerusalemer Heiligtumstraditionen in altkirchlicher und frühislamischer Zeit (Wiesbaden: harrassowitz, 1987), 81ff.; robert ousterhout, “The Temple, the sepulchre, and the martyrion of the savior (the relationship of the holy sepulchre and the Temple of Jerusalem manifested in Writings, Ceremonies, and architecture),” Gesta 29 (1990): 44–53; Yaron Z. eliav, God’s Mountain: The Temple Mount in Time, Place, and Memory (Baltimore: Johns hopkins University Press, 2005), 181–84. 39. Itin. Eger. 37.3. 40. Itin. Eger. 48–49; 2 Chron. 6:12; 7:5, 9; John 10:22 (ἐγκαίνια); Busse and Kretschmar, Jerusalemer Heiligtumstraditionen, 99–100; ousterhout, “The Temple, the sepulchre, and the martyrion of the savior”; Wharton, Refiguring the Post Classical City, 98–100. on the encaenia, see michael a. fraser, The Feast of the Encaenia in the Fourth Century and in the Ancient Liturgical Sources of Jerusalem (PhD diss., Durham University, 1995). 41. some recent studies on the Temple’s restoration: robert J. Penella, “emperor Julian, the Temple of Jerusalem, and the god of the Jews,” Koinonia 23 (1999): 16–31; stemberger, Jews and Christians in the Holy Land, 201–16; Jan Willem Drijvers, Cyril of Jerusalem: Bishop and City, supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 72 (leiden: Brill, 2004), 127–52; David B. levenson, “The ancient and medieval sources for the emperor Julian’s attempt to rebuild the Jerusalem Temple,” Journal for the Study of Judaism 35 (2004): 409–60; Johannes hahn, “Kaiser Julian und ein dritter Tempel? idee, Wirklichkeit und Wirkung eines gescheiterten Projektes,” in Zerstörungen des Jerusalemer Tempels: Geschehen—Wahrnehmung—Bewältigung, ed. Johannes hahn, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum neuen Testament 147 (Tübingen: mohr siebeck, 2002), 237–62; fergus millar, “rebuilding the Jerusalem Temple: Pagan, Jewish, and Christian Concepts,” Vestnik Drevei Istorii 264 (2008): 19–37. 42. greg. naz. Or. 5.3–4 (see now susanna elm, Sons of Hellenism, Fathers of the Church: Emperor Julian, Gregory of Nazianzus, and the Vision of Rome, Transformation of the Classical heritage 49 [Berkeley: University of California Press, 2012], 336ff.); ephr. syr. HcJul. 4.18–23 (lieu, The Emperor Julian. Panegyric and Polemic, 89ff.); Joh. Chrys., e.g., Adv. Iud. 5.11, Jud. et Gent. 16; ruf. Hist. eccl. 10.38–40; socr. Hist. eccl. 3.20; soz. Hist. eccl. 5.22; Theod. Hist. eccl. 3.20; Phil. Hist. eccl. 7.9.

Barsauma, Eudocia, Jerusalem, and the Temple Mount

99

cern of the Christians is understandable. had the project succeeded, Jesus’s prediction in matthew 24:2 that not one stone of the Temple would be left upon another would have been proven wrong,43 and the Jews would not only have restored their Temple but also have regained the city of Jerusalem. The episode of the events on the Temple mount as related in the Life of Barsauma is not the only report in syriac literature from the fifth–sixth centuries that demonstrates strong Christian emotions with regard to the Temple in association with a vehement anti-Judaism. There are a number of syriac texts that in their Christian sensitivity toward the Temple mount and in their hostility toward Jews bear remarkable resemblances to the Life and are of roughly the same date. Contextualizing the Life within this tradition of Christian anti-Jewish texts composed in the syriac-speaking regions of northern mesopotamia may give us a better understanding of the purport of the Life. T h e L I F E W i T h i n T h e C o n T e X T o f sY r iaC a n T i - J eW i sh l i T e r aT U r e

Julian’s attempt to restore the Jewish temple reinforced Christian anti-Jewish sentiments. ephrem syrus’s invective against the pagan emperor is the first example in syriac literature that expresses Christian sensitivity toward the restoration of the Temple mount to the Jews as well as a severe anti-Judaism. many texts with antiJewish tendencies would follow, of which i will mention only those with a Jerusalem connection.44 Two other syriac texts refer to Julian’s attempt to restore the Temple, the first a letter ascribed to Cyril—bishop of Jerusalem in the years 350–387.45 The letter dates from the first decades of the fifth century and describes many divine miracles that prevent the rebuilding of the Temple: a fire, which consumed a great number of Jews; strong winds and storms; and even an earthquake. in the end the whole city, Jews and many pagans, acknowledged god, and all were baptized, so that there was no one in the city who had not received the sign of the living cross in heaven.

43. Cf. also Daniel 9:26–27. 44. apart from the texts discussed here, other syriac texts from the same period that demonstrate a severe anti-Judaism include, for instance, the Doctrina Addai, the Life of Rabbula, and the syriac Life of Simeon Stylites. menze, “The Dark side of holiness,” 241 draws attention to the Vita Petri Iberi as being close to the Life of Barsauma both geographically and doctrinally. 45. The syriac text and an english translation were published by sebastian P. Brock, “a letter attributed to Cyril of Jerusalem of the rebuilding of the Temple,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 40 (1977): 267–86. for a discussion of Cyril’s letter, see Drijvers, Cyril of Jerusalem, 137–52.

100

Jan Willem Drijvers

The second is the syriac Julian Romance. This text, which dates from the first half of the sixth century, is a fictional account of the reign of Julian the apostate.46 The text, which is vehemently anti-Jewish, contains two longer passages on encounters between Julian and a delegation of Jews in which the Temple is the main topic. The first passage describes a meeting in Tarsus between Julian and a delegation of Jewish high priests at which the latter requested the restoration of the Temple by the emperor.47 in order to obtain their goal, the Jews violate their own laws through such acts as participating in pagan worship, eating sacrificial food, and pledging unconditional allegiance to Julian. in return Julian promises to protect the Jews and gives them permission to lay bare the foundations of the Temple. The second passage is a narration about a meeting between Julian and representatives of the Jews from edessa.48 The latter, seeking the emperor’s protection from the acts of anti-Judaism in their city, ask him to restore Jerusalem and the Temple. again, in order to achieve their goal, the Jews are willing to participate in pagan worship. Julian promises that when he returns victoriously from his Persian expedition, he will rebuild Jerusalem and restore the Temple to even greater glory than it possessed in solomon’s days. There are clear similarities between the eudocia episode in the Life of Barsauma, on the one hand, and the Letter of Cyril and the passages in the Julian Romance, on the other. The authors of the three texts take it for granted that the Jews have the desire to regain possession of the Temple mount and Jerusalem, and to have the Temple restored. By way of imperial intervention, Jewish access to the Temple mount is granted. miracles—storms and earthquakes sent by god—play an important role and bring harm upon the Jews when they have taken possession of the Temple mount. furthermore, in all three texts the Jews are defeated and Christianity is victorious; in the Life the heralds of the roman governor exclaim: “The Crucified has overcome” (§ 96.6); in Cyril’s Letter the Cross is presented as 46. The syriac text of the Julian Romance is published by hoffmann, Iulianos der Abtrünnige, Syrische Erzählungen. english translations are provided by gollancz, Julian the Apostate, and sokoloff, The Julian Romance, which also has the syriac text. on the Romance, see further Jan Willem Drijvers, “religious Conflict in the syriac Julian romance,” in Pagans and Christians in the Roman Empire (IVth–VIth Century A.D.): The Breaking of a Dialogue; Proceedings of the International Conference at the Monastery of Bose (October 2008), ed. Peter Brown and rita lizzi Testa (Vienna and Berlin: lit, 2011), 131–62; and Philip Wood, “We Have No King but Christ”: Christian Political Thought in Greater Syria on the Eve of the Arab Conquest (c. 400–585) (oxford: oxford University Press, 2010), 132–62. on the anti-Judaism in the Romance, see Jan Willem Drijvers, “The syriac Julian romance: aspects of the Jewish-Christian Controversy in late antiquity,” in All Those Nations: Cultural Encounters within and with the Near East; Studies Presented to Han Drijvers at the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday, ed. herman l. J. Vanstiphout (groningen: sTYX Publications, 1999), 31–42. on religious violence in this text, see Daniel schwartz, “religious Violence and eschatology in the syriac Julian romance,” Journal of Early Christian Studies 19 (2011): 565–87. 47. gollancz, Julian the Apostate, 117–26; sokoloff, The Julian Romance, 222–38. 48. gollancz, Julian the Apostate, 143–46; sokoloff, The Julian Romance, 270–79.

Barsauma, Eudocia, Jerusalem, and the Temple Mount

101

the symbol of victory, which is stained on the clothes of the Jews. however, what these texts have in common above all is a vehement anti-Judaism, the presentation of the Jews as the archetypal enemies of the Christians,49 and the serious concern that if the Temple were rebuilt, Christianity would lose its supremacy and Jerusalem would become Jewish again. Two syriac texts about the discovery of Christ’s Cross, both dating from the fifth century, also show a clear Christian sensitivity toward Jerusalem as a sacred place. first, there is the Protonike legend. This legend is a syriac version of the legend of the discovery of the True Cross dating from the first half of the fifth century and included in the Doctrina Addai.50 The narrative is set in the first century and reports the sojourn in Jerusalem of the Christian Protonike, wife of the roman emperor Claudius. having arrived in Jerusalem accompanied by her two sons and daughter, she wants to see golgotha, the wood of the Cross, and Christ’s tomb. however, these sites are under the authority of the Jews, who did not permit Christians to go and pray there. after Protonike has ordered the leaders of the Jews to deliver golgotha, the grave, and the Cross to the Christian community of Jerusalem, the empress enters Christ’s tomb where she finds three crosses. The empress recognizes the Cross of Christ by bringing it into contact with her daughter’s body (who had just suddenly died); the touch of the Cross brings her immediately back to life. To the displeasure of the Jews and the pagans, Protonike orders that a church be built over the tomb and golgotha in order that these places are honored. after her return to rome, Claudius immediately commands all of the Jews to leave italy. The second is the Judas Kyriakos legend. This narrative is the best-known version of the legend of the inventio crucis. soon after its origin, probably in Jerusalem, it became known in the syriac-speaking regions in the first half of the fifth century. The earliest manuscript of the text is in syriac.51 The legend tells how helena, mother of Constantine the great, comes to Jerusalem to search for the True Cross. she interrogates the Jews whom she suspects of hiding the Cross. eventually the Jew Judas comes forward and tells the empress that the Cross is buried on golgotha. he goes to golgotha and prays to god to show him the exact place where the Cross is hidden. When this is revealed to him by a divine sign he discovers three crosses.

49. sivan, Palestine in Late Antiquity, 217. 50. Doctrina Addai 16–30 (tr. howard, The Teaching of Addai, 21–35). Drijvers, Helena Augusta, 147– 63; Drijvers, “The Protonike legend, the Doctrina Addai, and Bishop rabbula of edessa,” Vigiliae Christianae 51 (1997): 298–315. on the Doctrina in general, see sidney h. griffith, “The Doctrina Addai as a Paradigm of Christian Thought in edessa in the fifth Century,” Hugoye 6.2 (2003): 269–92. on the reception of the Doctrina in the fifth and sixth centuries, see Wood, “We Have No King but Christ,” 82–127. 51. Drijvers, Helena Augusta, 165–80. han J. W. Drijvers and Jan Willem Drijvers, The Finding of the True Cross: The Judas Kyriakos Legend in Syriac; Introduction, Text, and Translation, CsCo 565, subsidia 93 (louvain: Peeters, 1997).

102

Jan Willem Drijvers

The True Cross is recognized by its power to bring a dead person back to life. on the site where the Cross was found helena builds a church. Judas becomes a believer and is baptized and is destined to become bishop of Jerusalem. Both versions of the legend of the discovery of the Cross are characterized by imperial intervention in favor of Christianity, and by a strong anti-Judaism, as well as the claim that Jerusalem had become Christian and was not Jewish anymore.52 in that respect these texts resemble thematically the Life of Barsauma. These narratives also demonstrate that Jerusalem was still very much a contested city. as is the case with Cyril’s Letter and the Julian Romance, there apparently existed a serious concern on the part of the Christians that the Jews would once again reclaim Jerusalem. it has recently been suggested that the Judas Kyriakos legend was composed in response to the Jewish gathering in the Temple mount as described in the Life of Barsauma, and that helena’s aggressive behavior toward the Jews in that narrative is presented as a model for the more lenient policy of eudocia in the Life.53 although interesting, this idea is unlikely, since the Life of Barsauma is most likely of a later date than the Judas Kyriakos legend.54 The episode about the events on the Temple mount as described in the Life was probably composed with the narratives of Julian’s attempt to rebuild the Temple in mind. in the Life eudocia takes the place of Julian. The author of the Life may also have had rufinus’s Church History, composed ca. 400, on his mind. The episode of the Jews coming to Jerusalem with the consent of eudocia and occupying the Temple mount may very well be a projection of rufinus’s statement that when the Jews were given permission by Julian to restore their Temple, “Jews came together from every place and province and began to make their way to the site of the temple.”55 The Life fits perfectly well into the tradition of syriac-Christian texts from the fifth-sixth centuries polemicizing against Judaism, emphasizing the defeat of Judaism in favor of Christianity, and showing a sensibility toward Jerusalem as a religiously contested city. in addition, the texts discussed above, although they have a

52. Cf. for another perspective Wood, “We Have no King but Christ,” 105–6, who suggests that the Protonike legend and other texts including the Life of Barsauma may reflect the tensions between the imperial authorities and the monastic and ecclesiastical authorities that acted against the Jews in the early fifth century. 53. Dilley, “The invention of Christian Tradition—‘apocrypha’, imperial Policy, and anti-Jewish Propaganda,” Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 50 (2010): 600–601. 54. The Kyriakos legend is referred to in sozomen’s Hist. eccl. (2.1.4), which was published ca. 450, while the Life of Barsauma was to all likelihood composed somewhat later (see the introduction and the conclusion in this volume) and was therefore probably not written in response to the Kyriakos narrative; for the date of the Kyriakos legend, see Drijvers and Drijvers, The Finding of the True Cross, 20. 55. rufinus, Hist. eccl. 10.38 (tr. amidon).

Barsauma, Eudocia, Jerusalem, and the Temple Mount

103

Sitz im Leben and refer to historical persons (e.g., helena, Julian), are all fictional to a large extent with regard to the events they relate. although the Life demonstrates some awareness of contemporary history and geography, this text is also predominantly fiction; it seems therefore unlikely that the events on the Temple mount and the meetings between eudocia and Barsauma as described in the text are genuine, as ernest honigmann argued more than half a century ago.56 C o n C lU D i n g r e m a r K s

The central theme of the Life of Barsauma is the triumph of Christianity at the expense of polytheism, Judaism, and the samaritan faith. With regard to the Jews, Jerusalem and its Temple mount in particular are central in the Life. By the time the Life was composed, there circulated several other hagiographic and polemical texts in the syriac-speaking world that have the triumph of Christianity as their central theme and are characterized by a strong anti-Judaism. The Life of Barsauma can best be understood within the context of this syriac Christian literary corpus of legendary texts that attack Judaism, and that reveal Jerusalem to be a contested city—emphasizing the defeat of Judaism in favor of Christianity. approaching and studying the Life of Barsauma as a treatise in the tradition of syriac anti-Jewish (and anti-pagan) Christian texts of fictional character from the fifth and sixth centuries help us to understand this fascinating hagiographic report better. While the Life is an excellent source for understanding the religious climate in the syriac-speaking regions in the fifth and sixth centuries, as a historical source it is unreliable and even fictional to a large extent. The happenings on the Temple mount and eudocia’s role as the catalyst of these events, as related in the Life, are a literary construct and ahistorical fabrication, and should therefore not be treated as historically reliable. By implication, therefore, the Life cannot help us in the task of reconstructing the biography of eudocia.

56. ernest honigmann, Le couvent de Barsauma et le patriarcat jacobite d’Antioche et de Syrie, CsCo 146, subsidia 7 (louvain: imprimerie orientaliste l. Durbecq, 1954), 16: “si la biographie trahit une certaine connaissance de l’histoire et le géographie contemporaine, cela n’empêche que, en grande partie, le contenu en soit légendaire.” also stemberger, Jews and Christians in the Holy Land, 312 considers a large part of the Life to be legendary.

5

Cleansing the sacred space The Holy Land and Its Inhabitants in the Pilgrimage Narrative of Barsauma reuven Kiperwasser and serge ruzer

This study addresses narrative strategies—narrative techniques and devices employed by the narrator in the service of his agenda—in the descriptions of Barsauma’s pilgrimages to the holy land as expressions of negotiating a Christian identity in a late antique syriac-speaking milieu.1 Unlike descriptions of pilgrimage as the crowning phase of Christian formation, Barsauma’s Life portrays him coming to Palestine from the east as an already accomplished ascetic and mystic—with a claim to authority over the holy places. it is in the context of this overarching scheme that we address the descriptions of Barsauma’s encounters with various segments of the population of Palestine during his fourth sojourn there—samaritans (the issue dealt with thoroughly in this volume by Johannes hahn), “deviant” Christians in control of the holy places (an anachronism seemingly representing later anti-Chalcedonian propaganda), pagans, members of the imperial adminis1. The study is based on our earlier article, published in hebrew: reuven Kiperwasser and serge ruzer, “The holy land and its inhabitants in the Pilgrimage narrative of the Persian monk Bar sauma,” Cathedra 148 (June 2013): 41–70; omitting some points of discussion featured in the hebrew version, it introduces a number of new ones. The hebrew study related mainly to a particular manuscript of the Vita Barsauma, whereas for this one we have used the preliminary edition, andrew Palmer, Life of Barsauma, forthcoming, kindly provided to us by the editors of the present volume. english translation of passages from the Life here, as well as division of the text into paragraphs, follow Palmer’s version in the present volume. in the meantime, another abridged reworking of this study has appeared in aryeh Kofsky and serge ruzer, in collaboration with reuven Kiperwasser, Reshaping Identities in Late Antique Syria-Mesopotamia: Christian and Jewish Hermeneutics and Narrative Strategies (Piscataway, nJ: gorgias Press, 2016), 181–216 (the research supported by The israel academy science foundation [grant no. 1344/12]).

104

Cleansing the Sacred Space

105

tration, and Jews. With regard to the Jews, their double function within the composition’s polemical framework will be highlighted: first, as the Christians’ competitors for presence and dominance in Jerusalem, propagating their own “map of the sacred pilgrimage”; second, as indicators of some Christians’ heretical deviations, insofar as the latter show empathy toward Jews. The polemic reaches its climax with the Jews plotting—under the patronage of empress eudocia—to renew their own festival pilgrimages to the Temple mount. The strategies employed in the Life will be analyzed, on the one hand, in light of other roughly contemporaneous Christian compositions justifying the forceful appropriation of synagogues, and, on the other hand, in comparison to a midrashic tradition from genesis rabbah that strongly rejects Jewish activist aspirations to rebuild the Temple. as an aside to our investigation’s emphasis on narrative strategies, the possible relevance of the suggested analysis for discussion of the historical setting behind this particular component of the Barsauma story is also outlined. here some our suggestions will differ from the more general appraisals expressed in the volume with regard to the historicity of other aspects of the Life by günter stemberger and Jan Willem Drijvers. Ba r s aUm a i n J e rU s a l e m

The Life portrays Barsauma as not only an accomplished ascetic but also a renowned miracle-worker whose incomparable miraculous powers were shown, inter alia, in bringing to an end the fatal cattle sickness in the whole region, from “lower Persia to the roman sea” (§ 77.1). Descriptions of Barsauma’s ascetic feats, mystical visions, and varied miracles occupy the major part of the narrative before the ascetic’s arrival in Jerusalem—highlighting the fact that he had reached the peak of his wonder-making aptitude prior to and not in connection with his pilgrimage. arthur Vööbus views the Life as a “foundation story” aiming to establish Barsauma’s image as an outstanding “athlete of faith,” an ascetic miracle-worker born in the vicinity of samosata and founder of the monastery in the border region of the Valley of Perrha—a story that would retain its appeal long after the “athlete’s” death.2 let us stress again that all these accomplishments belong to Barsauma’s activity outside of the holy land; the Life thus departs from the well-attested hagiographic pattern of pilgrimage as the “seal of Christian formation,”3 presenting its protagonist’s visits to the holy land in a quite different light.

2. see arthur Vööbus, History of Asceticism in the Syriac Orient: A Contribution to the History of Culture in the Near East (louvain: Peeters, 1958), 1:204–8. Vööbus identifies Perrha as being close to the border between the sasanian empire and the Kingdom of armenia. 3. see Brouria Bitton-ashkeloni, “from sacred Travel to monastic Career: The evidence of late antique syriac hagiography,” Adamantius 16 (2010): 353–70.

106

Reuven Kiperwasser and Serge Ruzer

Yet Barsauma’s visit to Jerusalem is definitely the high point in the sequence of his holy land travelogues. The city itself features prominently in the narrative, including the list of the holy sites familiar from other pilgrims’ accounts.4 The ascetic’s first day in Jerusalem is spent in the Church of the anastasis and the adjacent golgotha, with him later retiring to the monastery of the Church of holy sion. here the relics of stephen the protomartyr had been first deposed before being transferred to the Church of stephen, built for that purpose by empress eudocia in the mid-fifth century outside the northern gate of the city.5 in the middle of the night, however, Barsauma returned to the atrium of the golgotha Church (i.e., the Basilica of the martyrion), where a crowd of pilgrims was spending the night. as it turns out, one of the pilgrims was possessed by a demon, and apparently, the discreet appearance of Barsauma is to take the demon by surprise (§ 82.2–3). The successful exorcism was thus to be performed by a stranger, a pilgrim from the east, purifying the holiest site—an implied criticism of the Jerusalem Christians, who were even unaware of the demonic possession in their midst.6 There is no hint at this point of any theological debate—the rivalry between Barsauma and the locals seems here to have revolved rather around the question of authority and miraculous powers, but this brief incident would provide a paradigm for further cleansings of holy space by our ascetic. T h e J eW i sh o T h e r a n D e n C oU n T e r s W i T h e U D o C ia

The treatment of the Jewish other in Jerusalem is closely intertwined in the Life with Barsauma’s encounters with empress eudocia, who, within the Life’s narrative 4. see, for example, Pierre maraval, “les itinéraires de pèlerinage en orient (entre le 4e et le 7e s.),” Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum, ergänzungsband 20.1 (1995): 291–300; John Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrims before the Crusades (Jerusalem: ariel Publishing house, 1977), 49, 53. as all these locations belong to a fixed set of loci appearing in pilgrim accounts, a reasonable doubt may be voiced as to their bearing witness to the author’s actual acquaintance with Jerusalem; on the other hand, this cannot in itself be viewed as proof of the lack of historicity. one notes further that the v. Bars.’s urban map of Jerusalem also includes the municipal prison, wherein the monks of Barsauma’s entourage would soon be incarcerated. 5. see references in aryeh Kofsky and amitai spitzer, “The invention of stephen’s Tomb,” in Ut videant et contingant: Essays on Pilgrimage and Sacred Space, ed. Yitzhak hen and iris shagrir (raanana: The open University of israel, 2011), 29–48 [in hebrew]. see also edward D. hunt, Holy Land Pilgrimage in the Later Roman Empire, AD 312–460 (oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984), 218, 233; Kenneth g. holum, Theodosian Empresses: Women and Imperial Dominion in Late Antiquity, Transformation of the Classical heritage 3 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982), 112–228; elizabeth a. Clark, “Claims on the Bones of saint stephen: The Partisans of melania and eudocia,” Church History 51 (1982): 141–56. 6. for exorcism in the anastasis, see also Jerome, Letter 46.

Cleansing the Sacred Space

107

time frame, was then residing in the city.7 The first encounter with the empress to take place during Barsauma’s third sojourn in Palestine is described as serene or at least polite (§ 83). however, here one may already discern signs of tension: the narrator not only presents eudocia as submissive vis-à-vis Barsauma but also indicates that she was a sinner.8 moreover, eudocia’s spiritual stance before meeting Barsauma is compared to that of the wicked king of Babylon from the book of Daniel (§ 83.4). The most dramatic encounter between the two, however, occurs during Barsauma’s fourth journey, with its ensuing conflict over the empress’s pro-Jewish sympathies.9 The Life suggests that the root of the conflict was the galilean Jews ingratiating themselves with the empress, causing her to grant their request to assemble and pray at the Temple site (§ 91.1).10 The Life ignores what had supposedly been a well-established practice, whereby the Jews were allowed only one gathering each year on the Temple site, on the ninth of ab, the traditional date of the destruction of both the first and second Temples,11 instead referring to the feast of Tabernacles. in the Life, the Jews interpreted the permission as a cancellation of the old ban forbidding them to be in or near Jerusalem, and therefore as a sign of redemption and the ingathering of the exiles in the very near future. accordingly, they sent to their fellow Jews throughout the roman empire epistles calling on them to prepare and come to Jerusalem for the upcoming holiday of sukkot (Tabernacles), as it was during its celebration that the kingdom of israel would be reestablished, as the emperors of the romans themselves had decreed (§ 91.4). françois nau identified here a reference to a Jewish messianic revival following the favorable policies of the imperial authorities in Jerusalem and antioch between 423 and 438. Whereas in the region of antioch it was the renowned simeon stylites who forcefully opposed this tendency,12 in the Life it was Barsauma who fought against it in Jerusalem. 7. The question whether the narrative refers to her first short sojourn, in 438, or to her long stay in the city, between 444 (after her separation from Theodosios ii) and her death in 460, is still undecided. see also the discussion below. 8. on eudocia’s sinfulness, see § 83.22–24. 9. on the mysterious “business” that prompted Barsauma to urgently travel to Jerusalem to call the empress to order, see § 89. 10. Cf. françois nau, “Deux épisodes de l’histoire de la Vie de Barsauma le syrien,” Revue des Études Juives 83–84 (1927): 196–97. 11. see the famous description in Jerome, Commentary on Zephaniah 1.15–16. see also hillel newman, “Jerome and the Jews” (PhD diss., hebrew University of Jerusalem 1997), 172. 12. see Acta Martyrum et Sanctorum, ed. Paul Bedjan (Paris and leipzig: otto harrassowitz, 1894), 4:636–7. see also nau, “Deux épisodes,” 184; robert Doran, The Lives of Simeon Stylites, Cistercian studies 112 (Kalamazoo, mi: Cistercian Publications, 1992), 83, 190.

108

Reuven Kiperwasser and Serge Ruzer

Barsauma is said to begin his visit in the vicinity of the Temple mount on the first day of sukkot—namely, the day when the crowds of Jewish pilgrims were already there; the timing of his visit was deliberately calculated to thwart the scheming of the empress and the Jews (§ 91.5). having entered the city, Barsauma dwelt in the monastery “beside the Church of sion,” requesting to keep his presence secret—a detail that at this stage of the plot remains unexplained. later he goes to pray at siloam Pool (§ 91.6), which in ancient times had a long-standing reputation of having healing powers, also recognized by the gospel of John’s Jesus.13 The siloam Pool features as an obligatory stop on the route of late antique Christian pilgrims in Jerusalem.14 afterward, Barsauma returns to the monastery, whereas the monks from his entourage continue to the Temple mount. They are eager to visit the spot where the destroyed Temple of solomon once stood, but mainly to see the place where according to the gospel tradition the devil placed Jesus on the corner of the roof and tempted him there.15 it seems that the narrator intentionally presents Barsauma’s movements as different from those of his entourage, highlighting that throughout the day he was far away from the Temple mount and thus preparing for him a solid alibi with regard to the upcoming skirmishes there. The violent turmoil on the Temple mount is described twice: as a report on the occurrence at the time of the event and then in retrospect as related by the Jewish leaders, who would eventually be forced to concur with Barsauma’s version. here is the narrator’s version: people from Barsauma’s retinue, who had come to the Temple mount looking for the site of Jesus’s trial by satan, were shocked to find there a great multitude of Jews “clothed in black and sitting on the ashes of the ruined building” (§ 92.1). The Jews were mourning their destroyed sanctuary; they “wept, shredded their clothing, sprinkled ashes on their heads, and sat down on the ruins of the temple, groaning. it was noon” (§ 91.8). in fact, this is unusual behavior for the sukkot celebration, when mourning is explicitly prohibited.16 it stands to reason therefore that what we encounter here is a stereotypical depiction of Jews, who supposedly always grieve for their Temple. The author also mentions the number of the Jews present, 103,000 men and women, which indicates that for him this crowd comprises not only galilean Jews but also diaspora Jews who had

13. see John 9:7; cf. nehemiah 3:15. see also rabbinic evidence: t arachin 2:6, t. Parah 9:2, y. Taanit 2.1 [65a]. 14. see, e.g., Itin. Burd. 589 (Csel 39, ed. P. geyer, 21; tr. a. stewart 19–20). for analysis of the story of the traveler from Bordeaux and other witnesses, see ora limor, Pilgrimage Travels to the Holy Land: Christian Pilgrims in Late Antiquity (Jerusalem: Yad izhak ben-Zvi, 1998), 32, 157, 160, 172–73, 183–84, 204, 230, 234–35 [in hebrew]. 15. see matthew 4:5–7. 16. see m. moed Qatan 1:5, 3:5; t. moed Qatan 2:9.

Cleansing the Sacred Space

109

responded to the call of the “epistle of redemption.” The Jews therefore do there what the authorities have permitted to them—they pray for the restoration of the Temple—but for Barsauma’s fellow travelers this was a shocking abomination taking place at the very location of satan’s plotting against Jesus. one of the monks, seized by deep anxiety, began urging his brothers to run away as fast as possible, because this impious gathering of the criminal Jews would surely be punished by god’s wrath. again, the course of the narrative is clearly designed to create an alibi—now for Barsauma’s followers—claiming that they desperately wished to avoid any contact with the Jews on the Temple mount (§ 91.9). The incident on the Temple mount receives its justification through an exegetical reference to an unspecified biblical prophecy threatening the unruly Jews (§ 92.1–3): “There are two predictions in the Prophets,” he went on, “which are about to come true. But look out! We must hurry away from here! The Wrath of the lord is on the point of striking the Jewish people!” . . . hardly had he [the monk] finished explaining the words, when a sudden great clamor was heard from the Jews. They were screaming in terror and running in all directions.

it has been suggested that the author might have had in mind here three biblical oracles: isaiah 31:5, Jeremiah 31:23, and Daniel 9:24–27.17 none of these passages, however, speaks of the imminent punishment of the remnant of israel in a time of the upsurge of their eschatological hopes. The issue remains undecided, but if “two utterances” are to be understood as sayings by two prophets, we can tentatively suggest an alternative possibility. our text might have learnt about the future expulsion and exile of the “remnant of israel,” which tries to get hold of the holy land, from Jeremiah 24. To this end, our hypothetical interpretation must ignore the historical context of the biblical passage (Jeremiah 24:8–9, emphasis added): But thus says the lorD: like the bad figs which are so bad they cannot be eaten, so will i treat Zedeki’ah the king of Judah, his princes, the remnant of Jerusalem who remain in this land, and those who dwell in the land of egypt. i will make them a horror to all the kingdoms of the earth, to be a reproach, a byword, a taunt, and a curse in all the places where i shall drive them.

The statement from isaiah 37 where the “remnant” also features prominently could have then been interpreted in this light—by the method of verbal analogy and seemingly inverting the original meaning of the prophecy. The promise of salvation is thus turned into a threat of expulsion caused by the zeal of god and his heavenly host (isaiah 37:31–32, emphasis added):

17. § 92.1 with note 117.

110

Reuven Kiperwasser and Serge Ruzer and the surviving remnant of the house of Judah shall again take root downward, and bear fruit upward; for out of Jerusalem shall go forth [according to this interpretation: shall be expelled] a remnant, and out of Mount Zion a band of survivors. The zeal of the lorD of hosts will accomplish this.

in any case, it seems that our author is aware of the fact that the Jews, perceived as stubborn rivals in the struggle for control over Jerusalem, can rely on biblical prophecy that provides wide support for their hopes of eschatological restoration. it is instructive then that in such a situation the Life feels it necessary to try to refute exegetically sound Jewish claims by producing a counterclaim based on the same prophetic sources. in fact, this seems to be an extraordinary instance in the Life of an effort to recruit prophetic support for current events. The fact that the prophecy remains unspecified fits well with another case where the authority of Jewish scripture is evoked: in Barsauma’s encounter with a samaritan, the ascetic is portrayed as involved in a disputation about the Torah exegesis, but no specific verses are mentioned. it is also possible that at the stage of fixing the narrative tradition in writing, the memory of specific verses either was lost or lost its significance. Though the story is manifestly one-sided, it does bear witness to a collision between two interpretive narratives relating to the Temple mount. for the Jews, the site marks the place of the destruction of past glory, with the Divine Presence still remaining there in expectation of the sanctuary’s restoration and renewal of worship. in contradistinction to that, for Barsauma’s followers the site signifies the place of satan’s malicious designs and is therefore condemned to eternal desolation. as evidenced by the early sixth-century anonymous Short Description of Jerusalem, the site of Jesus’s temptation by satan was included in the Christian pilgrimage map of the city.18 however, unlike in the Life, where the nature of the Temple mount is unequivocally defined in negative terms, in the Short Description the positive identification of the mount with solomon’s Temple is maintained, with the place of Jesus’s temptation being located on the margins of the compound. it is noteworthy that the early fourth-century Bordeaux account referred to the tower where the devil had tried Jesus on the margins of the mount and its surroundings, whereas the central area was associated there with solomon’s Temple and the king’s victory over the demons.19 in the Life, however, the entire Temple compound is perceived through its connection to the devil. There is no expression of sympathetic curiosity toward the biblical sanctuary of solomon—but instead a lack of reverence, which is also

18. geyer, Itinera Hierosolymitana, 114–21. Cf. andrew Cain, The Greek “Historia Monachorum in Aegypto”: Monastic Hagiography in the Late Fourth Century (oxford: oxford University Press, 2016), 36–37, 168. 19. Itin. Burd. 590–91 (ed. geyer, 21–22); see also stewart, 20–21.

Cleansing the Sacred Space

111

clearly attested in an earlier episode where Barsauma angrily destroys the synagogue on the east Bank of the Jordan river, the size and beauty of which are sarcastically compared to the Temple of solomon (§ 38.1).20 Thus, according to the narrator, just when Barsauma’s band was trying to get away from the place, a murderous chaos ensued—a shower of deadly stones, screaming, and dead bodies piling up. Jews saw the vision of angels descending from heaven to avenge them. however, the author notes that at this point it was not yet clear to any one of those present, including the Jews themselves, from what direction all the stones were falling that were killing them mercilessly. While Barsauma’s people recognize here a punishment from heaven, the Jews refuse to admit that, preferring to slander the Christians and say it was Barsauma’s monks who threw the stones and caused many to die. When Jews apprehend the leader of the group—which in the narrator’s version had actually advised his friends to run away—and blame the monks for the violence, government officials, roman guards, and local clergy accept in good faith the Jewish version of the events. They all band together and put Barsauma’s monks in custody for interrogation. as for the Jews, they went in procession to the empress, who was at that time in Bethlehem, to demand justice. They pointed out explicitly that the killers were strangers who had come to the city from distant mesopotamia and by their criminal behavior defiled the monastic robes.21 initially, eudocia was inclined to punish the suspects by the rule of lex talionis: those who allegedly caused death among Jews by the spear should die by the spear, those who acted with the sword should die by the sword, and so on. it is for that reason that the empress and local clergy went to inspect the corpses of the Jews to ascertain the cause of death. a surprising development, however, hindered the procedures, and following the counter-advice of the queen’s councillors, the authorities arrested the “priests of the Jews” (kāhne d-yudāye), pressuring them to reveal who had truly caused the death of their coreligionists on the Temple mount.22 The Life gives the following

20. Cf. the destruction of other Jewish and samaritan synagogues, as well as pagan temples, described in § 34.1. 21. see § 93.4. 22. § 94.2–3. The phrase “priests of the Jews” may, in principle, refer to priests of aaronic descent perceived as the leaders of galilean Jewry. indeed, some scholars have raised the suggestion that even in late antiquity, priestly families still constituted an alternative leadership to that of the rabbis; see, for example, oded irshai, “The role of the Priesthood in the Jewish Community in late antiquity: a Christian model?,” in Jüdische Gemeinden und ihr christlicher Kontext: Konzeptionen und Aspekte, ed. Christoph Cluse, alfred haverkamp, and israel J. Yuval (hannover: hahnsche Buchhandlung, 2003), 75–85. however, the author of the Life applies the same appellation—“ ‫ܟ̈ܗܐܢ‬, kāhne, priests”—to the Christian leadership (§ 69.1). it is thus possible that the term “priests” to denote the dominant position of the clergy in Christian society was by analogy applied to the Jewish leadership without necessarily pointing to its aaronic character.

112

Reuven Kiperwasser and Serge Ruzer

explanation for this sudden turn of events (§ 94). a Jewish woman mourning the dead suddenly collapsed and died. This was the reason that “the priests of the Jews,” fearing that the same fate would befall the rest of their brethren, came forward and acknowledged the innocence of the monks, confessing that in fact the disaster had been effected by angels armed with luminous spears (rumhe d-man˘ heran) (§ 94.4). in addition, those “Jewish priests” who had been immediately arrested and shackled admitted that some of the victims fell down and were trampled by the panic-stricken crowd frightened by the menacing appearance of the roman guard. all this is tailored in the narrative so as to explain and repel the accusations originally made against the monks (§ 94.5). if any doubts remained, they would be immediately alleviated: “at that moment five of the Jewish corpsebearers fell down dead, their bodies as hard as stones. This convinced the entire Christian people community. now everyone acknowledged that the blow which had fallen on the Jews had come from god” (§ 95.2). Ba r s aUm a V e r sU s T h e l o C a l C l e r g Y

Telling is the ambivalence in the narrator’s attitude toward the local clergy. on the one hand, local priests (kashishe d-ʽidtha) as well as government officials collaborate with the Jews in arresting the monks suspected of rioting, in an attempt to bring them to justice (§ 93.3). even eudocia counts on the cooperation of the clergy in her effort to punish the perpetrators. on the other hand, when a turnaround in the legal process occurs, the clergy and the empress’s confidants are described as leading the new course of action: they come to the prison, begging for the monks’ forgiveness. meanwhile in Jerusalem a group of local bishops had gathered to debate Barsauma’s deeds. originally inclined to accept eudocia’s position, they were soon persuaded by the petitions of lay Barsauma supporters to confront the empress (§ 95.8). The local clergy thus differ from the empress herself, who continues to be suspected by the masses, and apparently by the narrator as well, of sympathy for the Jews and of a malicious intent against the monks. even her insistence on bringing the governor from Caesarea to Jerusalem, which would take six days—ostensibly to release the prisoners according to due process (b-nāmusā) and thus avoid accusations of bias from the Jews—is presented as a ploy to hurt Barsauma’s disciples (§ 95.6). after the governor’s arrival the struggle between the imperial administration and the Christian mob would last a while longer before being finally resolved in favor of Barsauma’s followers (§ 95.10–12). The bishops eventually aligned with Barsauma against the Jews, but cooperation between them was limited to the “Jewish Problem,” or rather to the struggle against the Jewish presence and influence in Jerusalem. elsewhere in the Life, bishops consistently represent deviant forms of Christianity opposing the christological views of the narrative’s protagonist. Thus

Cleansing the Sacred Space

113

bishops try to disrupt the healing activities and exorcisms of Barsauma and to that end send epistles to their parishes (egrāthā d-esorāyā) forbidding any contact with the itinerant monk (§§ 133–134). moreover, in accordance with the contemporaneous style of religious polemics, the narrator does not hesitate to put into the mouth of demons a statement to the effect that the bishops are demons’ “brothers and intimates (ahe w-habibe) [who] opened the door for us [demons] to enter into the ˘ ˘ world” (§ 136.3). if not for the prayers of the pious ascetic who did not succumb to the demons and chased them zealously, the demons would have been able to prevail over all the Christian communities of the province (§ 136.2). There is no remaining doubt left with regard to the nature of the concord between the demons and the bishops, which is at the foundation of their cooperation. The gate opened for the demons by the church leaders is a gate of apostasy (tarʽā d-kāpurthā) (§ 136.3). it turns out that the bishops and their followers share the belief that the body of Christ is entirely human (d-pagrā da-mshihā akh pagrā haw d-nāshā) (§ 137.1), a view vehemently opposed by Barsauma, who is portrayed as subscribing to a radical idea, according to which not only Jesus’s nous but even his body is “absorbed” into divinity.23 The narrator puts the same quasi-Chalcedonian claim (pagre d-yeshuʽ akh pagrā haw d-nāshā) in the mouth of a demon, speaking through a woman,24 to emphasize the sinister character of the infidels’ Christology. B e T W e e n na r r aT i V e s T r aT e g i e s a n D h i sT o r iC a l C i r C Um sTa n C e s

The general premise that the narrative strategies of the text serve a later agenda seems plausible. The assumption that remnants of authentic traditions from the early fifth century are embedded in the Life is similarly plausible. however, drawing a clear distinction between echoes of historical circumstances and literary fiction is not always a simple task. The characteristics of the protagonist displayed in the Life appear to reflect, at least in general terms, the historical Barsauma and certain traits of contemporaneous syriac Christianity, though, of course, one should bear in mind the legendary character of the narrative inclined to exaggeration. These characteristics, mostly corroborated by external evidence, include Barsauma’s extremely ascetic personality, identification with a radical christological stance at the margins of the “miaphysite spectrum,” passionate hostility toward other variants of contemporaneous Christianity—such as antiochene/semi-nestorian, 23. see Dietmar W. Winkler, “monophysites,” in Late Antiquity: A Guide to the Postclassical World, ed. glen W. Bowersock, Peter Brown, and oleg grabar (Cambridge, ma and london: harvard University Press, 1999), 586. 24. see also § 66.

114

Reuven Kiperwasser and Serge Ruzer

proto-Chalcedonian, and even those siding with moderate one-principle-of-nature christological views—and violence employed against opponents of various kinds.25 The conflict with the bishops also fits well with the overall picture of ongoing collisions between the holy ascetics and the church establishment.26 The difference in the pattern of Barsauma’s actions between his second and later journeys may likewise reflect a historical reality—the necessity to adapt to new regulations responding to the violent conduct of zealous monks.27 even when reflecting the concerns of its later redactional phase, the narrative might still retain and reinforce earlier motifs now acquiring a new relevance.28 Thus, the radical stance ascribed to Barsauma against the notion of the humanity of Christ’s body could have reflected an early extreme offshoot of a christological trend that would be utilized and refined in the context of the early sixth-century Julianist/severan polemics—polemics that would continue for a long time to divide the church in armenia and syria-mesopotamia, the base of Barsauma’s movement.29 We have focused on narrative strategies related to the dramatic conflict with the Jews in Jerusalem, especially during Barsauma’s third and fourth pilgrimages, involving empress eudocia, local Christians, and government officials. however, we are also willing to probe the possible historical background of these strategies. reassessing the issue, oded irshai concluded, contrary to earlier views, that this “dim affair” is not at all historically credible. irshai addressed Barsauma’s story in the context of the discussion of the hadrianic/Constantinian ban on Jews residing in and visiting Jerusalem, except for the annual mourning pilgrimage on the ninth of ab (see above). according to irshai, the attribution of the ban to the first Christian emperor is legendary, invented by the church of Jerusalem for political reasons to enhance the sanctity of Jerusalem and establish the hegemony of the Jerusalem church there against Jewish claims.30 all this because in the fifth

25. see Vööbus, History of Asceticism, 198–208. 26. see ovidiu ioan, “Controverses entre la hiérarchie ecclésiale et les moines dans le christianisme syriaque,” in Le monachisme syriaque, ed. florence Jullien, Études syriaques 7 (Paris: geuthner, 2010), 89–106. for collision between a saint and bishops, see Peter Brown, “The rise and function of the holy man in late antiquity,” Journal of Roman Studies 61 (1971): esp. 84–95. see also Jean séguy, “Philippe escolan, Monachisme et Église: Le monachisme syrien du IVe au VIIe siècle; Un monachisme charismatique,” Archives de Sciences Sociales des Religions 116 (2001): 93–156. 27. see nau, “Deux épisodes,” 192–93. 28. see Paul C. Dilley, “The invention of Christian Tradition: ‘apocrypha’, imperial Policy, and anti-Jewish Propaganda,” Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 50 (2010): 598. 29. see discussion in aryeh Kofsky, “Julianism after Julian of halicarnassus,” in Between Personal and Institutional Religion: Aspects of Thought and Practice in Eastern Christianity (5th to 8th Century), ed. Brouria Bitton-ashkelony and lorenzo Perrone (Turnhout: Brepols, 2013), 251–94. 30. see oded irshai, “Constantine and the Jews: The Prohibition against entering Jerusalem— history and hagiography,” Zion 60 (1995): 129–78. see also holum, Theodosian Empresses, 217–8.

Cleansing the Sacred Space

115

century Constantine’s reign became painted in strongly idealistic colors, and was viewed as worthy of etiological elaborations. Thus, the story in the Life about the Jewish assembly on the Temple mount does not have a historical basis, but was most likely invented by the author to add Constantinian prestige to the hadrianic ban on the Jewish presence in the holy City.31 The arguments concerning the fictitious character of Constantine’s ban are rather convincing. it seems that Jews were unwanted in the city from the time of hadrian on, and it was an ongoing prohibition—often “dormant,” sometimes less and sometimes more—rather than a ruling firmly established during the reign of Constantine. however, this understanding does highlight the historical importance of our story, albeit in a different sense, as the Life seems to reflect the perceptions promoted by the Jerusalem church in the relevant period. These perceptions concerning the imminent danger of a Jewish reconquista of Jerusalem and suspicion of the authorities’ collaboration with the Jews formed an integral part of the common culture that influenced narrators of hagiographic stories, from that of the traveler from Bordeaux to our Life. in the latter case, they engendered an important literary invention: the image of an empress who has abandoned the ways of Constantine and is now ready—like Julian the apostate—to bring the Jews into the holy place. in the early twentieth century, françois nau believed in the historicity of the story about the gathering of Jews on the Temple mount and even more of the possibility of the galilean Jews’ cooperation with the roman government in an attempt to reestablish the Jewish cult in Jerusalem.32 much later, Paul Dilley would accept nau’s position, arguing that behind the legendary character of the story there is a reflection of historical events, informing the narrative’s rhetorical language.33 he furthermore proposed that the fifth-century text of Judas Kyriakos actually constituted a kind of reaction to the events depicted in the Life. in other words, both these Christian compositions represent apologetic responses to the fifth-century episode of a Jewish ingathering on the Temple mount.34 others, however, have been doubtful about the historical validity of the Life in general and the depiction of Jewish religious excitement on the Temple mount in particular.35

31. irshai, “Constantine and the Jews,” 162–63. 32. according to nau, “Deux épisodes,” 196, it was a kind of patriotic Jewish movement of galilean origin—he used the word “Zionistic”—with messianic expectations, which he dated to around the year 438. 33. Dilley, “invention of Christian Tradition,” 598. 34. Dilley, 599601. 35. see ernest honigmann, Le couvent de Barsauma et le patriarcat jacobite d’Antioche et de Syrie, CsCo 146, subsidia 7 (louvain: imprimerie orientaliste l. Durbecq, 1954), 6–23. see also stemberger’s contribution in this volume.

116

Reuven Kiperwasser and Serge Ruzer

on the cautious side, it may be claimed that the Life’s description of Jewish activity on the Temple mount is nothing but fiction inspired by Deuteronomy 31:7–13, where a renewal of the covenant on the feast of Tabernacles, involving the general ingathering of israel, is depicted. if so, this episode reflected the author’s general ideas about Jewish messianism linked to the biblical passage. still, even in light of such doubts it is worth trying to comprehend what purpose was served by this narrative unit, one of the most central and prominent in the Life. g e n e si s r a B Ba h a n D T h e QU e sT io n o f J eW i sh m e s sia n iC aC T i V i sm

in our opinion, a comparative reading of the story from the Life with another narrative, which has similar components and was composed at roughly the same time that a hypothetical nucleus of the Life’s story came into existence, can contribute to clarifying the issue. This narrative, found in an important rabbinic midrashic anthology, genesis (Bereshit) rabbah (late fourth–early fifth century), reads as follows (genesis rabbah 64.10):36 in the days of r. Joshua b. hananiah the [roman] empire ordered the Temple to be rebuilt. Papos and lulianos set tables from acco as far as antioch and provided those who had come up from the Diaspora with their basic needs. Thereupon the samaritans went and warned the King (ezra 4:13): “ ‘now be it known to the King that if this city is rebuilt and its walls completed, they (the Jews) will stop paying’—meaning, taxes.” “What can i do,”—said the King,—“as i have already given the order?” “send a decree to them that they should change the site of the construction work or [its measures]—they will then withdraw from it of their own accord.” now, when . . . the [new] decree arrived, the congregation . . . burst out weeping and considered revolting against the roman power. Thereupon they [the leaders] decided: let a wise man go and pacify the congregation. . . . let r. Joshua b. hanania go, as he is a master of the Torah (scholastiqon de-oraita)! he therefore went and preached to them: “a lion devoured its prey and a bone stuck in his throat. Thereupon he proclaimed: ‘i will reward anyone who removes it!’ an egyptian heron, which has a long beak, came, pulled the bone out and demanded his reward. ‘go!,’ the lion replied, ‘your reward is that you will be able to boast that you entered the lion’s mouth in peace and came out in peace.’ even so, let us be satisfied that we entered into dealings with this nation in peace and have emerged in peace.” 36. The original text is found in Bereshit Rabba, mit kritischem Apparat und Kommentar (ed. Y. Theodor and C. albeck), 710–11. The translation is from Midrash Rabba Genesis (tr. h. freedman), 580 with some changes. This book is the oldest exegetical compilation on genesis, originating in roman Palestine, more precisely in galilee, that preserved numerous literary traditions of the previous period. see günter stemberger, Introduction to the Talmud and Midrash, tr. markus Bockmuehl (edinburgh: T&T Clark 1996), 276–83.

Cleansing the Sacred Space

117

The plot focuses on the attempt to initiate the rebuilding of the Temple, and thus the renewal of Jewish worship on the Temple mount, with a great mass of excited Jewish pilgrims arriving from asia minor in anticipation of the event. Papos and lulianos, two famous brothers from laodicea,37 are funding this “Zionist enterprise,” providing food for the exiles, who where heading from antioch to acco (acre). Yet because of the menacing machinations of the samaritans, the treacherous “others” of the midrashic story, the whole project was canceled. To prevent a Jewish revolt and the inevitable bloodshed, the leaders of the people appealed to rabbi Joshua ben hananiah, the famous “Torah scholasticon,” who managed to alleviate the disappointment of the agitated crowd with the help of the aramaic version of an aesopian fable. a parallelism is evident between the description of the passionately enthusiastic Jews at the beginning of the story in genesis rabbah and the depiction of Jewish enthusiasm in the Life. Both texts highlight the Jewish anticipation of the dispersal of their people coming to an end and the role of the roman empire in that eschatological development—in genesis rabbah as in the Life, it is the romans who order Jerusalem to be restored as a city of Jewish sanctuary. in light of the motif ’s appearance in these two apparently independent narrative units—one in the Life and another in the midrash—it seems that the idea of rebuilding the Temple so that not only Jews but also people of other religions would be able to offer their sacrifices there was present at the back of storytellers’ minds of the period.38 ephrem the syrian’s Hymns against Julian provide a fine early example of this motif.39 it is difficult to know whether it was actually the actions of Julian the apostate that had induced such imaginary plots, or rather the early existence of such a story—probably current in late antiquity among Jews and gentiles—that prompted the decision of the anti-Christian emperor to grant the Jews a new Temple.40 The rabbinic narrator situated his plot in the distant past in the period of r. Joshua ben hananiah—in accordance with what researchers have identified as 37. There is a long history of confusion between these two historical figures from laodicea and Jewish martyrs from lidda; see William horbury, “Papus and lulianus in Jewish resistance to rome,” in Jewish Studies at the Turn of the 20th Century I, ed. Judit Taragona Borras and angel saenz-Badillos (leiden: Brill, 1999), 289–95. see also Joshua J. schwartz, Lod (Lydda), Israel: From its Origins through the Byzantine Period, 5600 B.C.E.–640 C.E. (oxford: Tempus reparatum, 1991), 124–25. 38. see, for example, Yannis Papadoyannakis, “a Debate about the rebuilding of the Temple in sixth-Century Byzantium,” in Antiquity in Antiquity: Jewish and Christian Pasts in the Greco-Roman World, ed. gregg gardner and Kevin l. osterloh (Tübingen: mohr siebeck, 2008), 372–82; andrew s. Jacobs, Remains of the Jews: The Holy Land and Christian Empire in Late Antiquity (stanford, Ca: stanford University Press, 2004), 195. 39. Hymns against Julian 1 (ed. e. Beck, CsCo 175), 71–75. 40. for discussion of the Jewish desire to rebuild the Temple as a topos in early Christian literature, see Papadoyannakis, “Debate about the rebuilding of the Temple”; Jacobs, Remains of the Jews, 195.

118

Reuven Kiperwasser and Serge Ruzer

reflections of the historical reality from the time of hadrian. hadrian, before embracing an anti-Jewish policy, attempted to make peace with the Jews, offering to rebuild the Temple; but the evil advice of the samaritans prevented the reconstruction.41 however, this identification seems problematic because the other protagonists of the story are the brothers lulianos and Papos, who seem to have lived during the reign of Trajan.42 We thus cannot positively identify the echoes of certain events of the second or the third–fourth centuries underlying this remarkable story, but it stands to reason that the narrator needed these figures from the Jewish past in order to respond to challenges of his own time.43 let us enumerate the substantial narrative elements in the genesis rabbah story that are parallel to those in the Life: (a) the decision of the roman authorities to allow Jewish worship in the Temple area or, alternatively, on the Temple mount; (b) the mass arrival of Jews from distant regions, guided by messianic enthusiasm, at the beginning of the plot; and (c) the ultimate inevitable failure of the project. it is known that the samaritans, who feature here in genesis rabbah, in fact constituted a politically influential faction in late fifth-century Palestine; moreover, they actively participated in conflicts between contemporaneous representatives of various christological tendencies in the country. The rabbinic narrator might have been aware of these political realities. a hypothesis may be posited that the narrator of the story found in genesis rabbah knew of some unfortunate occurrence that had taken place on the Temple mount around his time and responded to it by creating the narrative. Yet in the absence of clear proof, the question will have to remain open. it is instructive, however, that both Christian and Jewish narrators attest to an aversion to messianic activism—activism probably widespread among the (nonrabbinic) Jewish masses. C o n C lU D i n g r e m a r K s

Whereas the Life’s narrative strategies vis-à-vis samaritans find expression in Barsauma’s successful efforts to convert them to Christianity,44 Jews in Jerusalem are portrayed as the unwanted other clearly belonging to the past.45 such an attitude seems to be intrinsically connected to the intense rivalry over the holy space: the Jewish Temple, according to our author, should remain in ruins as the locus of 41. see aharon oppenheimer, Between Rome and Babylon: Studies in Jewish Leadership and Society, ed. nili oppenheimer (Tübingen: mohr siebeck, 2005), 234. 42. see horbury, “Papus and lulianus.” 43. see oppenheimer, Between Rome and Babylon, 234 n. 35. 44. see §§ 80, 84. see also hahn’s contribution in this volume. 45. But cf. the episode of a Jewish seaman’s conversion outside of the holy land (§ 79).

Cleansing the Sacred Space

119

abomination. The author’s preoccupation with the struggle for control over the holy land against the Jews, with the imperial authorities and local clergy suspected of religious deviations, of which sympathetic treatment of the Jews is presented as an important side effect, informs the theme of overlap between Barsauma’s and eudocia’s visits to Jerusalem. in the Life, the empress faces a prototypical choice between the path of Constantine (to whom the prohibition against the Jews dwelling in Jerusalem is attributed) and that of Julian the apostate (remembered as someone who had collaborated with the Jews in an attempt to rebuild the Temple). The author, aware of competing Jewish claims for their own sacred landscape, needed to elaborate an etiological story that would explain how the holy City had been finally cleansed of the presence of the Jewish other. faithful to his approach, he leads the protagonist through the holy land’s memorable sites, and particularly those in the holy City: unlike the usual hagiographic descriptions of pilgrimage as the crowning phase of a believer’s spiritual development, here an accomplished ascetic comes from the east in a fierce crusade to cleanse the sacred realm of the holy land. Characteristically, Barsauma teaches a lesson to not only the Jews, samaritans, and pagans but even more so to the Christians who have strayed from the right path either by expressing sympathy for the Jews or by christological deviations, making themselves easy prey to the devastating influence of demons. Connection to Jews, that ultimate other, thus becomes a central feature of the story—where the decline of Christianity in Palestine is diagnosed, the shadow of the Jew will appear. similarities with other Christian narratives recorded in the fifth century, aiming to justify the appropriation of synagogues and their conversion into churches vis-à-vis the sometimes vacillating policies of the imperial authorities, have been duly noted. in the Jerusalem context of the Life, the tension runs even higher, as the appropriation pertains to the desolate site of the Temple, the target of undying Jewish messianic aspirations, which have to be zealously suppressed. We have also discussed the possible historical context of the Life’s narrative strategies. in general, the image of Barsauma in the Life, when checked against other relevant sources, confirms both the general outline of his character and what we know about syrian monasticism in general: extreme asceticism, violent activism, participation in the theological quarrels of the time, siding with strict christological positions on the margins of the one-principle-of nature spectrum and, finally, conflict with the church establishment. even extreme views regarding the nature of the body of Christ may reflect an opinion already existing in Barsauma’s time. all this, however, does not preclude questioning the factual accuracy of the Life’s descriptions of, for example, Barsauma’s stay in Jerusalem during his last visit to the holy land. We have argued that even when there is room for doubt concerning the historical details, the composition faithfully reflects the perception of reality as inherited from the Life’s Christian environment and interpreted by the

120

Reuven Kiperwasser and Serge Ruzer

author—namely, the perception of the “Jewish threat” to the Christian pilgrimage map of the holy City. even if it is an adaptation of a narrative pattern relating to the appropriation of synagogues by Christians in the West, the Life came to reflect what its author perceived as an ultimate struggle for Jerusalem against the Jewish claims. finally, it turns out that the midrash Bereshit rabbah attests to a similar image of the radical Jewish other—here meaning Jews outside the rabbinic elite—that wants to ascend en masse to the Temple mount and reestablish there israel’s ancient sanctuary and cult. We are faced, then, with two testimonies, coming from two different imagined communities, which reject—on different grounds—Jewish activism aspiring to regain control over Jerusalem and the Temple mount. The responses of the two sides, between which a literary connection does not appear probable, seem to reflect the same fear of a phenomenon still deemed dangerous in the fifth century and perhaps even later. it is at least in this sense that our two narratives reflect a reality. The existence of these two independent but complementary traditions, moreover, may also strengthen the historical plausibility of the existence of turmoil of this kind.

6

“it is not lawful for samaritans to have dealings with Christians!” Samaritans in the life of Barsauma Johannes hahn

anybody who reads or skims the Life of Barsauma will realize what an exciting, original, and rich text this indeed is—a fascinating mirror of ascetic existence, village life, sacred topography, and religious conflict in the near east. The Life touches on several highly important issues: the local and regional role of monastic communities and leaders, religious groups in the holy land, the destruction of temples and synagogues, eudocia and Jerusalem, the division of the Christian church, and so on. however, nobody would argue that the samaritans, the Jewish sect1 that has been chosen for analysis in this study, figure strongly in this hagiographic text. nor does samaria, the region of Palestine between Judea and galilee, which still bore this name in contemporary sources, although it administratively belonged to the late roman province of Palaestina i. The relevant episodes directly involving samaritans and samaria—and these are just two, in §§ 80 and 84—fit onto a single page; a very generous selection, also including all passing remarks on samaritans, does not exceed two pages. To justify a study of the samaritans in the Life of Barsauma may seem difficult at first sight. however, since we indeed largely lack contemporary evidence on the 1. The literature on the origins, identity, and history of the samaritans is vast and has generated numerous hypotheses and theories. however, central characteristics are the community’s loyalty to the gerizim and to the Torah in its possession, the samaritan Pentateuch—these were (and are) the key points of difference between the samaritans and the Jews. a convenient starting point for orientation is the important volume edited by alan D. Crown, ed., The Samaritans (Tübingen: mohr siebeck, 1989); other helpful works include magnar Kartveit, The Origin of the Samaritans (leiden: Brill, 2009); gary n. Knoppers, Jews and Samaritans: The Origins and History of Their Early Relations (oxford: oxford University Press, 2013); and, most recently, reinhard Pummer, The Samaritans: A Profile (grand rapids, mi: William h. eerdmans, 2016), 9–25—all with extensive bibliographies.

121

122

Johannes Hahn

samaritans for most of the fourth and fifth centuries, we are grateful for every new piece we can add to this meager corpus.2 not without good reason has the fifth century been labeled “the missing century” in the history of late roman Palestine in general, thus acknowledging the general dearth of written sources for this crucial period in the region’s history.3 although the samaritans, like the Jews, flourished in late antiquity, there exist almost no samaritan sources: what we have are samaritan chronicles from as late as the fourteenth century that no doubt derive in part from our epoch, and that contain some very valuable bits of information. Contemporary samaritan inscriptions, on the other hand, are neither numerous nor do they provide much information.4 in addition, there are rabbinic sources, which are selective, often very critical, not to say unfavorable, and notoriously difficult to date.5 not much better and equally selective and biased is the Christian tradition, mostly theological works.6 as a matter of fact, we almost have to reach the end of the fifth century, a quarter of a century after Barsauma’s death, before we possess substantial sources again, in the form of near-contemporary accounts of samaritan history. it is in the context of the great samaritan revolts in Palestine of the years 484, 529, and 556 that the historian Procopius and the chronicler John malalas give detailed narratives of the suppression of these uprisings and of the almost complete annihilation of the samaritan people. most of these important sources—and that means much of the historical and theological discussion— however, contribute little to understanding the treatment of the samaritans in the context of the Life of Barsauma and their role within the hagiographer’s agenda. These are the focus of the following analysis. 2. John Bowman, Samaritan Documents Relating to Their History, Religion, and Life (Pittsburgh: Pickwick, 1977); Jürgen Zangenberg, ΣΑΜΑΡΕΙΑ: Antike Quellen zur Geschichte und Kultur der Samaritaner in deutscher Übersetzung (Tübingen and Basel: a. francke, 1998); reinhard Pummer, Early Christian Authors on Samaritans and Samaritanism: Texts, Translations, and Commentary (Tübingen: mohr siebeck, 2002). 3. Zeev safrai, The Missing Century: Palestine in the Fifth Century; Growth and Decline, Palaestina antiqua 9 (leuven: Peeters, 1998). 4. Jeremy m. Cohen, ed., A Samaritan Chronicle (leiden: Brill, 1981); Crown, The Samaritans, 390–515. for archaeological, epigraphical, and other sources, see the recent overviews by Benyamim Tsedaka, “reevaluation of samaritan studies due to the new Discoveries in excavations,” in Die Samaritaner und die Bibel, ed. Jörg frey, Ursula schattner-rieser, and Konrad schmid, studia Judaica 7—studia samaritana 70 (Berlin: de gruyter, 2012), 419–26; and shimon Dar, “archaeological aspects of samaritan research in israel,” in Religious Diversity in Late Antiquity, ed. David gwynn and suzanne Bangert (leiden: Brill, 2010), 189–98. on samaritan inscriptions: reinhard Pummer, “inscriptions,” in Crown, The Samaritans, 190–94. 5. Best accessed by eyal Ben-eliyahu, Yehudah Cohn, and fergus millar, Handbook of Jewish Literature from Late Antiquity, 135–700 CE (oxford: oxford University Press, 2012). 6. Conveniently brought together and commentated by Pummer, Early Christian Authors; and Zangenberg, ΣΑΜΑΡΕΙΑ.

Samaritans in the Life of Barsauma

123

of course, the fundamental question here must be, Can these two rather modest episodes involving samaritans in the Life of Barsauma—plus the bare handful of bits or rather scraps of evidence in the Life where samaritans are briefly mentioned—contribute to our knowledge of the samaritans in late antiquity? But more important, and more promising as well, may be to ask what they can contribute to our understanding of the genesis and internal structure of our Life, of the literary methods and hagiographic and theological aims of its author. and on top of all this comes the truly crucial problem: Can the image and treatment of the samaritans in our hagiographic text perhaps give clues toward the date of the composition or redaction of the Life of Barsauma? We should, however, for the sake of clarity and honesty, formulate the appropriate alternative questions as well: have the two samaritan episodes to be dismissed as purely conventional, more or less meaningless anecdotes that, beyond mentioning samaritans in Palestine, have no bearing on questions concerning samaritans? Do they thus only represent another set of Barsaumian miracles neatly embedded into a different local and religious setting, only providing additional coloring to the author’s hagiographic ambition? Could these episodes have nothing to tell us about Barsauma and his travels and deeds? Could they, then, perhaps be nothing more than hagiographic inventions? in such a worst-case scenario, can they at least reveal some of the hagiographer’s own sentiments or attitude toward samaritans, their distinctiveness, and their position in the process of Christianizing the holy land? a number of observations will serve as a starting point for my analysis. short summaries of the two key sections of the text will help to provide from the very beginning, however, some preliminary background to the argument. Both of the episodes (§§ 80 and 84) narrate miracles worked by Barsauma in samaria, one in the city of sebaste, the other in an unnamed village. The first episode, in § 80, describes Barsauma’s debate with a samaritan “teacher of the law,” and, after the samaritan’s defeat, Barsauma’s successful treatment of his opponent’s fatally ill wife. The sage had demanded this demonstration as final proof of the saint’s superior doctrine. as reward, the whole family of the respected samaritan converts to Christianity. other locals are taught by Barsauma as well, and further miracles are performed by the saint at this place. The second episode, in § 84, contains a healing miracle as well, numbered, in the heading, as the fifty-sixth sign in the Life. again it takes its start from a theological dispute, this time, as the hagiographer explains, with the whole of the population of a samaritan village on a sabbath day. The reader learns that the issues at stake, the resurrection of the dead and the son of god, had to be discussed by Barsauma solely with reference to the Pentateuch: the samaritans did not accept any other books of the Bible. again Barsauma is victorious, and again his opponents ask for final proof for the incontestable superiority of the saint’s faith: this time—aptly chosen along the line of the discussion before—the villagers challenge

124

Johannes Hahn

him to call back to life a boy who is just breathing his last. The saint then brings about the requested resurrection of the youngster, and not only the boy’s father and brother, but also many samaritans of the village, convert to Christianity. g e o g r a P h Y, i T i n e r a rY, T o P o g r a P h Y: hag io g r a P h Y i n C o n T e X T

What places did Barsauma see or visit in samaria, the central region of northern Palestine, and which parts of the other regions where samaritans settled in large numbers, in other words the important and densely populated coastal areas, and in particular the province’s capital, Caeasarea?7 The author grossly disappoints the reader here. he is no Jerome, whose Lives—of Paul, hilarion, and malchus, not to mention melania—abound with geographical detail, precise descriptions of routes and of the religious and ethnic geography of the near east, especially Palestine.8 although our saint is indeed a wandering ascetic and thus repeatedly on the move,9 his hagiographer remains stubbornly silent on the exact routes the holy man and his disciples trod through the east. The alleged four journeys to Jerusalem— although they represent the most important structural element of the Life— amount to a very disappointing itinerary indeed, and this fact is important for the assessment of the samaritan evidence as well. Young Barsauma’s first journey to Jerusalem, clearly an invention of the hagiographer,10 gives no intermediate stops at all. on the contrary, the Life claims that “he resolved . . . neither to enter a village, nor to pass into a city. . . . Thus he went and thus he returned [later], all the way to the east” (§ 4.1). The narrative of the second journey has Barsauma leave his monastery, arrive directly in Jerusalem, and then head for mount sinai in the southern desert (where he never arrives). Besides remarks like “in every place [Barsauma] came to he worked wonders” (§ 36.6), there are only two destinations singled out and named on 7. for the strong samaritan element in Caesarea’s population, see lee i. levine, Caesarea under Roman Rule (leiden: Brill, 1975), 107–12; Kenneth g. holum, “Caesarea and the samaritans,” in City, Town, and Countryside in the Early Byzantine Era, ed. robert l. hohlfelder (Boulder, Co: east european monographs, 1982), 65–73. This group “appears to have been the largest minority group within the city under the later empire” (levine, 107). samaritan presence along the the entire Palestinian coast is well attested after the Bar Kohkba revolt. for the numerical strength and geographical distribution of the various ethnic and religious groups in Palestine, see Claude Dauphin, Palestine Byzantine: Peuplement et Populations I–II, British archaeological reports 726 (oxford: archaeopress, 1998). 8. susan Weingarten, The Saint’s Saints: Hagiography and Geography in Jerome (leiden and Boston: Brill, 2005). 9. on this, see Caner in this volume. 10. The story mirrors a topos in syriac literature: Cornelia B. horn, “Children as Pilgrims and the Cult of holy Children in the early syriac Tradition,” Aram 18–19 (2006–7): 439–62.

Samaritans in the Life of Barsauma

125

this route, reqem d-gaya and rabbat moab, the scenes of two of Barsauma’s most spectacular, and violent, anti-pagan and anti-Jewish deeds, plus another one, close by—namely, the arnon valley—which was the scene of a similar deed of one of his followers. reqem d-gaya and rabbat moab both lay—if andrew Palmer is right in identifying reqem d-gaya with areopolis—east of the Dead sea and thus identify the Via nova Trajana as Barsauma’s road to the south and to mount sinai.11 alas, we are allowed to learn nothing about his way back home: almost miraculously our saint arrives in the region of antioch again, only to be welcomed and greeted—an important hagiographic stratagem—by simeon stylites, the most important saint of the age and unrivaled icon of ascetic holiness in the east (§ 46.1).12 it is in the course of Barsauma’s third journey to Jerusalem that the saint, according to his Life, arrives in sebaste to interact with samaritans for the first time. Before this, one hears quite a bit about the initial part of the journey: Barsauma passed through harran (i.e., Carrhae in northern mesopotamia, south of edessa) and traveled on with his followers—a band of 100 monks, rather than only 40, as on his second journey—to laodicea to take a ship to Cyprus. it may be noted that this rather erratic sequence of destinations does not constitute a reasonable route at all. Then one hears of the group’s near shipwreck on the sea route to Palestine, with various miracles. in § 80.1 the Life abruptly continues: “When the blessed man was about to enter a city called sebaste in the land of Palestine . . . ,” and the first samaritan episode commences. Barsauma’s band of companions, however, has disappeared. There is no indication of where Barsauma disembarked—although this can only have been Caesarea maritima, the provincial’s capital—to cross samaria on the trunk road leading to its eminent urban center, neapolis.13 following this route he closely passed by—and easily reached—sebaste. equal silence falls on the ensuing path and route to Jerusalem. Barsauma’s visit to the holy City comprises the expelling of a devil (§ 82) and the second extended encounter and discussion with eudocia (§ 83). his main occupation in Jerusalem is otherwise the visit or veneration of various Christian holy places. These are, it may be noted, practically the only urban buildings mentioned anywhere in the Life of Barsauma (we shall return to the only other instance later). and then, without much ado or travel, the saint is already back in samaria! it is “in a certain village” (§ 84.1) where the hagiographer places Barsauma now, again on his own, to enter into a victorious theological disputation with the local population culminating, after the healing of a boy, in a remarkable missionary success. 11. for the problem of identifying these places, see also stemberger in this volume. 12. see menze in this volume. 13. for routes through samaria: John Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrims before the Crusades (Warminster: aris & Phillips, 2002), 43–47.

126

Johannes Hahn

Caesarea Bethsan Scythopolis

Ginae

Salim Aenon

Dothan

S

a

m

a

r

i

a

Samaria Sebaste Sichar

Neapolis

Antipatris Ioppe Phasaelis

Arimathea Lydda Diospolis

Iamnia Gazara

Azotus Asdod Ascalon Askelon

Gophna

Modin

J

Bethel

Emmaus Gibeon Nicopolis

Ephraim Archelais Rimmon Iericho

Rama

Anathoth Jerusalem Ölberg Hierosolyma Bethphage Qumran Bethsemes Bethania

u

Adullam

d

a

e

a

Bethlehem Etam Herodium

map 6.1. samaria at the time of Jesus. hubert Jedin et al., Atlas zur Kirchengeschichte (freiburg: herder, 1987), map 1.

The very next paragraph drastically summarizes again: “Traveling on toward the east, Barsauma . . . ” (§ 85.1). The author here leaves out, so he claims, details of the joyous welcome that cities and villagers offered Barsauma on his way, before he safely arrived back at his monastery up in the mountains. The position of the two samaritan episodes—immediately before and after Barsauma’s third visit to Jerusalem—besides suggesting some kind of itinerary, underlines the importance of the saint’s dealing with this religious group: the samaritans represent, as the reader is reminded in two programmatic entries in the course of the Life (§§ 4.2 and 34.1), one of the three major religious groups competing with Christianity in Palestine and the near east.

Samaritans in the Life of Barsauma

127

Ba r s aUm a i n se Ba sT e ( s a m a r ia )

Before entering into the discussion of the character of anti-samaritan violence in the Life of Barsauma as evoked in § 34.1 or of the general image of the samaritans in the text, it is first necessary to follow the saint on his way through samaria to knock at sebaste’s city gate, or, rather, take a rest there (§ 84.1). it must nevertheless be stressed that locating the first samaritan episode in sebaste is not the most obvious choice—although it may, of course, reflect an authentic scene. The much more important samaritan center was neapolis (today’s nablus), near biblical shechem, situated at a distance of just 7 km from Jerusalem directly on the important overland route to the holy City, and not like sebaste only to be reached by a turnoff. it was an important roman colony from its foundation as flavia neapolis (later iulia neapolis) by Vespasian in 72 c.e. however, sebaste, 56 km north of Jerusalem, was the biblical city in samaria.14 as such, it was well known to educated Christian readers of the Bible as the royal capital of the kingdom of northern israel until its capture by the assyrians in 721 b.c.e. To overcome in a public debate, in this biblical place, a samaritan sage who represented an important group of the ancient Jewish people and to win over, with the help of a healing miracle, samaritans to the Christian faith signaled a fundamental, historical transformation to the Life’s readers. here some of the earliest roots of the Jewish people in the holy land were now, by Barsauma’s intervention, in a way Christianized. The late antique reader of the Life, unsurprisingly, does not learn anything about the heavily hellenized, later romanized society and architecture of the city in Barsauma’s day.15 having profited from the policies of massive urbanization under herodes—the king also changed the city’s name from samaria to sebaste in honor of augustus—the urban center and its hinterland saw a massive exchange of parts of the population in the aftermath of the Jewish wars, while under hadrian a new wave of urbanization resulted in the promotion of cities like Caesarea maritima and Bet she’an to roman coloniae. sebaste, like neighboring neapolis, was embellished with new buildings in the severan period; then it was granted colonial status by septimius severus around 200 as well (Colonia lucia septimia severa). The old herodian forum and other monumental buildings were extensively 14. 1 Kings 16:24: royal capital under king omri. The further biblical history is mainly documented in 1 and 2 Kings. for the archaeological situation, see nahman avigad, “samaria,” in The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land IV (new York: 1993), 1300–1310; ron e. Tappy, “samaria,” in The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East IV, ed. eric m. meyers (new York and oxford: oxford University Press, 1997), 463–67. 15. John Winter Crowfoot et al., The Buildings at Samaria: Samaria-Sebaste (london: Palestine exploration fund, 1942); Dianne van de Zande and Jürgen Zangenberg, “Urbanization,” in The Oxford Handbook of Jewish Daily Life in Roman Palestine, ed. Catherine hezser (oxford: oxford University Press, 2010), 165–88. Concise information is offered by avigad, “samaria.”

128

Johannes Hahn

map 6.2. sebaste: City plan with main archaeological sites. John W. Crowfoot et al., The

Buildings at Samaria, vol. 2 of Samaria-Sebaste (london: Palestine exploration fund, 1942), fig. 39.

renovated in this period. Barsauma’s hagiographer passes over all this, history and topography alike, with silence. his report seems to suggest that the city, inhabited by a samaritan population, is indeed a samaritan one (§ 80). in the overall context of the Life this is a highly important observation. Pagans, Jews, samaritans, and Christians are always kept strictly apart. in the text, these groups do not coexist. They seem, contrary to historical facts, not even to live together in a community: each village or city, in the view of our hagiographer, is devoted to a single faith. anybody else, like the Jews who come to Jerusalem for their religious festivals, appears as an invader. in the Life of Barsauma we encounter a simplistic and polarized world, living at the brink of social and religious collisions and violence. and Barsauma, in this polarized world, operates as an agent, and agitator, of religious challenge and conflict, and sometimes of straightforward violence. Before turning to a discussion of the episode about the healing of the samaritan woman in sebaste, it is instructive to focus on and take notice of some topographical and architectural features. The city today is an important archaeological site with impressive remains from several epochs.

Samaritans in the Life of Barsauma

0

35

Samaria-Sebaste

Nisf Jubeil

400

1

662

0

45

421

spring aqueduct

2

450

Ein Mafsala

c

400

Ignisinya

400

Naqura 3

360

450

450 500

tunnel bridge

676

0

550

Ein Harun

c

1

km

Dh

642

500

aha rat

0 40

576

a-S

hei k

0 35

550

667

689

h

609

500

642

628

0 55

Deir Sharaf 535

500

W. H

ari

za

400

598

Zawata 530

Jebel cAjram 400

N. Shechem 524

129

5 627

414

Beit Iba

50 0

461

4

544

810

940

45 0

Ein Beit el-Ma

c

658

Rafidia

480

Shechem

772 689

812

map 6.3. aqueduct from shechem to samaria-sebaste. a. frumkin, “The Water-supply

network of samaria-sebaste,” in The Aqueducts of Israel, ed. David amit, Joseph Patrich, and Yizhar hirschfeld, Journal of roman archaeology, supplementary series 46 (Portsmouth, ri: Journal of roman archaeology, 2002), 268.

The episode in § 80 contains a small detail that deserves to be scrutinized for authenticity, whatever this might mean in a hagiographic source. it starts: “it was noon and Barsauma was waiting in the shade of an aqueduct to enter this city.” The mention of an aqueduct comes as quite a surprise. it is the only roman building referred to in the entire Life and it is also the only instance of any urban architecture— besides three churches and a prison in Jerusalem, and the empress eudocia’s palace in Bethlehem—that shows up in this hagiographic text. it reminds us first that Barsauma, the ascetic “who dwells in the northern massif ” (§ 77.2), is never depicted as entering or strolling through a city, except, in a very rudimentary way, Jerusalem, even though a dozen cities or so are mentioned in the narrative of his Life. his antiurban attitude and gestures are evident elsewhere.

130

Johannes Hahn

But does the distinctive topographical notion of an aqueduct in sebaste happily providing the visiting saint with shade for a siesta withstand historical examination at all? scholarly opinion, based on observations of various archaeological expeditions in the 1930s, seems to prima facie exclude this.16 excavations could, in quite elaborate detail, reveal only an impressive underground aqueduct leading from springs in the southeast of the city to the forum area. however, this apparently decisive refutation of the hagiographer’s depiction is unfounded. The most recent analysis of the water supply network of samarian sebaste by amos frumkin shows that precisely the very last segment of the 15-km-long underground aqueduct from shechem to sebaste made a construction of this type necessary.17 The flowing water, reaching a saddle east of the city, which sits on an isolated hilltop, had to, as it happens, run over an arched bridge about 50 m high that carried the aqueduct into the city. Building blocks of the foundations of two large piers, placed in rock-cut trenches, still remain in situ and prove the former existence of a stunning construction that is lost today. although conclusive chronological evidence is missing, the aqueduct may best be ascribed to septimius severus and his reshaping of the city.18 We cannot definitely know whether Barsauma once sat at one of these piers. But they would indeed have been a prominent landmark of late roman sebaste for anybody entering the city, as well as a striking achievement of roman engineering. as a historian, i prefer to see this reference to a distinctive architectural feature of the city of sebaste as an indication of the story’s authenticity—or of a familiarity of some kind with the local situation on the part of the hagiographer (or his source), at least. That the Life’s wording explicitly, and in passing, connects the aqueduct’s location with the city gate in sebaste’s topography adds weight to the passage. it is not conceivable that this specific scenery sprang from a hagiographer’s free imagination or was inserted intentionally at some later point into the story. Ba r s aUm a , D e s T r oY e r o f sY nag o g U e s o r m i s sio na rY i n P e aC e ?

it is helpful to take another, closer look at the Life and its treatment of samaritans. as mentioned above, the samaritans are named in two programmatic entries in the course of the Life (§§ 4.2 and 34.1) as one of the three major religious groups competing with Christianity in Palestine and the near east. and in the same 16. Crowfoot et al., The Buildings at Samaria, 74–81 (aqueduct). 17. amos frumkin, “The Water-supply network of samaria-sebaste,” in The Aqueducts of Israel, ed. David amit, Joseph Patrich, and Yizhar hirschfeld (Portsmouth, ri: Journal of roman archaeology 2002), 267–77. 18. see the editor’s note (277 n. 12) at the end of frumkin, “The Water-supply network.”

Samaritans in the Life of Barsauma

131

context it is crisply expressed that the sacred infrastructure of these three groups was at the heart of Barsauma’s zeal when traveling the region. his agenda is outlined in § 34.1: “he began to demolish the Jewish sabbath-houses, destroy the samaritan synagogues, and burn down the pagan temples.” however, in spite of this programmatic declaration, one looks in vain for an account of the destruction of a samaritan synagogue in the Life.19 has the author forgotten to narrate it, has it been lost, or was it removed later? not at all. rather, it appears that Barsauma’s dealings with the samaritans are indeed different. The level of conflict between the saint and this religious group is not to be compared with the polarization and anti-pagan and anti-Jewish fervor we encounter elsewhere. The destruction of a samaritan synagogue or any other form of violence would not have been in accord with Barsauma’s or his hagiographer’s perception of samaritanism. The first episode, the healing of the samaritan woman, already makes this quite clear. although one could take the story as evidence for resistance—or rather initial resistance—to Barsauma’s missionary efforts, one is struck by the generally peaceful, almost dignified circumstances of Barsauma’s appearance and involvement with members of the samaritan local population and their religion. The evidence of the other samaritan episode is no different. There, “on his way home Barsauma again passed through samaria. he happened to be in a certain village on the sabbath Day, and all the inhabitants came to see him. They disputed with him about the resurrection of the dead and the son of god, both of which they denied, as they denied the existence of the holy spirit and the angels. Barsauma disputed with them on the basis of the law of moses, because the samaritans do not accept any other scripture. he went through the law word by word, from the beginning to the end, proving his point to them” (§ 84.2–3). all in all, the profile of these samaritans and of Barsauma’s dealings with them in the Life is markedly moderate, the level of conflict spelled out limited, the dispute focused on theological matters, and hostility entirely lacking. is it, then, perhaps possible to question the hagiographer’s initial programmatic claim in the light of other observations and more general considerations? indeed, it can be shown that the samaritans, unlike 19. gottfried reeg, Die antiken Synagogen in Israel II: Die samaritanischen Synagogen, Beihefte TaVo, reihe B 12/2 (Wiesbaden: reichert, 1977), in particular 534–44; reinhard Pummer, “samaritan material remains and archaeology,” in Crown, The Samaritans, 139–47 with summaries of the excavated synagogues of sha’alvim, Bet she’an, ramat aviv, and nablus; Yitzhak magen, “samaritan synagogues,” in Early Christianity in Context. Monuments and Documents, ed. frédéric manns and eugenio alliata (Jerusalem: franciscan Printing Press, 1993), 193–230 (about twenty samaritan synagogues in the land of israel have been discussed and published, of which only seven have been excavated or surveyed); reinhard Pummer, “samaritan synagogues and Jewish synagogues: similarities and Differences,” in Jews, Christians, and Polytheists in the Ancient Synagogue, ed. steven fine (london and new York: routledge, 1999), 118–60.

132

Johannes Hahn

their Jewish and pagan neighbors in the holy land, apparently were not seen as the same kind of opposition or straightforward enemies by Barsauma (or his hagiographer).20 The image of the samaritans in the Life lacks any negative connotation beyond their initial resistance and disbelief. The worst Barsauma’s hagiographer has to say about them is a remark in § 4.2 that shows strong signs of being a later addition, since it tries to introduce a retrospective and abbreviated historical overview of the general situation, and the unhappy living conditions of Christians, in Palestine in former days. There it says: “now at that time pagans abounded in Palestine, Phoenicia, and arabia. Christians were as yet few in number in those countries. The Jews and the samaritans, on the other hand, were rich. They persecuted the Christians of that region.” otherwise, no bad word is wasted on the samaritans by the hagiographer or a later editor. on the contrary, the samaritans are described as serious believers, knowledgeable about their Bible, keen on debating and understanding their holy text, and eager to learn a better argument and message. any stubbornness is alien to them. This observation is important because it stands in stark contrast to the image the Life draws of the other religious groups Barsauma and the Christians are confronted with in Palestine. The pagans fare relatively well: nevertheless, when Barsauma turns up they are filled with fear; they take to arms to battle the saint (§ 34.2); and their priests are pretty stupid, obstinate, and stubborn in their resistance (§ 35.4). When Barsauma tries to teach them he has to talk to them with “powerful and terrible” words (§ 34.9), but cannot resort to subtle theological or philosophical arguments. They start jeering at him when a miracle he promised does not immediately materialize: “at this the pagans loudly vented their blasphemous contempt. There was laughter on all sides, when someone mocked, ‘Christians, your god is a liar, it would seem. he has no power to make it rain for us’” (§ 34.15). Despite the eventual abundant rainfall the chief priest refuses to give in. he has to be threatened and blackmailed by his fellows first. furthermore, he needs an extra portion of terror— his two daughters are instantly befallen by demons—before in the end he breaks down and pleads for mercy (§§ 35.4–36.5). only after such strenuous efforts on the part of Barsauma do all the city’s inhabitants become Christians. even darker is the image the Jews earn in the Life. They also confront Barsauma hostilely and in fact physically battle him, allegedly with 15,000 men (§ 38.3), shooting arrows and throwing stones at the saint (§ 39.1). later, in their vain attempt to win official permission to visit and mourn their desolate temple in Jerusalem “the spirit of arrogance entered them” (§ 91.3). They write deceitful letters 20. This “positive” picture of samaritans in the Life resembles the one in the new Testament: Jörg frey, “‘gute’ samaritaner? Das neutestamentliche Bild der samaritaner zwischen Juden, Christen und Paganen,” in frey, schattner-rieser, and schmid, Die Samaritaner und die Bibel, 203–33.

Samaritans in the Life of Barsauma

133

(§ 91.5), they scream in terror when a sudden celestial thunder is heard (§ 92.3), they try to stone Barsauma’s disciples (§ 93), they accuse the monks of murder, they oppress and persecute the Christians (§ 95.6), and so on. remarkably, and quite in contrast to his dealings with the samaritans, nowhere does Barsauma enter into any theological discussion with the Jews. The anti-Judaic fervor of the narrative of the events in Jerusalem is all too evident.21 and it is equally clear that this rejection of and fury against Jews, which was familiar and popular in the fifth century, derives from the Christian reproach that they were responsible for Jesus’s death, and so were regarded as the ultimate murderers of god’s son. This fervor had been fuelled only a few decades earlier by the emperor Julian and his abortive attempt to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem in order to restore the traditional Jewish cult and its sacrifices there. The plan, and the resulting wave of Jewish eschatological enthusiasm, created a lasting traumatic experience for the church, as the Temple’s permanent destruction had always been presented as irrefutable proof of the new covenant and the transfer of god’s grace to the Christian Church. one aspect of the two samaritan episodes should strike the reader from the outset: Barsauma’s remarkable success in converting his samaritan counterparts. everywhere in the Life the saint works miracles, but only a small number are said to have openly aimed at or actually accomplished conversions—much less than one would expect in a hagiographic text of this kind, filled with signs and miracles. The traditions regarding simeon and Daniel stylites are striking examples here.22 Compared to the low conversion rate Barsauma achieves in his dealings with pagans and, in particular, with Jews in the Life, his success in teaching and literally missionizing his samaritan audience stands out. This is not a coincidence, but instead relates to historical reality, at least in the fifth century. The readiness of samaritans to submit to the prevailing political and religious conditions and pressures is repeatedly reported in our period. samaritans entered, despite legal restrictions, the imperial administration; served, for instance, in large numbers in the office of the provincial governor in Caesarea; and in some cases acquired, with the embrace of Christianity, senatorial dignity. Procopius, a native of Caesarea himself, speaks of crypto-samaritans, of superficial conversions for opportunistic motives: “The samaritans, regarding it as a foolish thing to undergo

21. Volker menze, “The Dark side of holiness: Barsauma the ‘roasted’ and the invention of a Jewish Jerusalem,” in Motions of Late Antiquity: Essays on Religion, Politics, and Society in Honour of Peter Brown, ed. Jamie Kreiner and helmut reimitz, Cultural encounters in late antiquity and the middle ages 4 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2016), 231–48. 22. robin lane fox, “The life of Daniel,” in Portraits: Biographical Representation in the Greek and Latin Literature of the Roman Empire, ed. mark J. edwards and simon swain (oxford: oxford University Press, 1997), 175–226, in particular 212–14.

134

Johannes Hahn

any suffering in defence of a senseless dogma, adopted the name Christian in place of that which they bore.”23 one also finds considerable numbers of samaritans serving in the late roman army, but no Jews.24 rabbinic sources claim that samaritans in the cities were willing to convert rather than risk their lives when put under pressure by the Christian government.25 Unlike among much of the samaritan rural population, in urban circles adaptability, it seems, was not an empty word but rather often a strategy of compromise, advancement, or well-chosen assimilation. The episodes in the Life of Barsauma thus mirror a specific contemporary phenomenon in some local samaritan communities in Palestine. This phenomenon is characteristic for the dynamics of the province’s development under late roman rule prior to the outbreak of the great samaritan revolts that brutally ended this increasing assimilation of parts of the samaritan population. The reality of Barsauma’s active “involvement” in this process may be debatable and impossible to assess, but the episodes’ compatibility with the historical background lends them an authentic ring. other devoted Christians were equally active: empress eudocia tried to convert a samaritan village near her palace in Jamnia by erecting a church with famous relics.26

23. Procopius, Anecd. 27.6–7; see also Aedif. 5.7; Hist. secr. 11.24–30; holum, “Caesarea and the samaritans,” 65–73. however, Procopius has been suspected of being a crypto-samaritan himself by some authors: Katherine adshead, “Procopius and the samaritans,” in The Sixth Century. End or Beginning? ed. Pauline allen and elizabeth Jeffreys (Brisbane: australian association for Byzantine studies, 1996), 35–41. it should be noted that, several centuries earlier, opportunism represented the most conspicuous trait in flavius Josephus’s picture of the samaritans, and perhaps a topos in describing this Jewish sect. magnar Kartveit, “Josephus on the samaritans—his Tendenz and Purpose,” in Samaria, Samarians, Samaritans: Studies on Bible, History, and Linguistics, ed. József Zsengellér, studia Judaica 66 = studia samaritana 6 (Berlin: de gruyter, 2011), 109–20. 24. Crown, The Samaritans, 61, 209 with bibliography; Jonathan P. roth, “Jews and the roman army: Perceptions and realities,” in The Impact of the Roman Army (200 B.C.–A.D. 476): Economic, Social, Political, Religious and Cultural Aspects, ed. lukas de Blois and elio lo Cascio (leiden: Brill, 2007), 409–20. 25. andreas lehnhardt, “The samaritans (Kutim) in the Talmud Yerushalmi: Constructs of ‘rabbinic mind’ or reflections of social reality?,” in The Talmud Yerushalmi and Graeco-Roman Culture III, ed. Peter schäfer (Tübingen: mohr siebeck, 2002), 139–60 with a collection and discussion of rabbinic statements. note also Pummer, The Samaritans, 66–74. 26. John rufus, V. Petri Iberi 166. Cornelia B. horn, “empress eudocia and the monk Peter the iberian: Patronage, Pilgrimage, and the love of a foster-mother in fifth-Century Palestine,” Byzantinische Forschungen 28 (2004): 210. Compare John rufus, V. Petri Iberi 43, referring to Poemenia’s (PLRE ii 894–95) efforts at Christianizing what might be samaritans by destroying an idol on mount gerizim; John rufus, V. Petri Iberi 4 (although it is not clear whether the idol destroyed on mount gerizim was a samaritan one [of which kind?]: it makes more sense to understand it as a pagan cult statue in the precinct of the hadrianic Zeus temple nearby). see also edward D. hunt, Holy Land Pilgrimage in the Later Roman Empire, AD 312–460 (oxford: oxford University Press, 1984), 160–67. Peter the iberian might himself been involved in missionary efforts toward samaritans; John rufus, V. Petri Iberi 184.

Samaritans in the Life of Barsauma

135

Possibly there is even more authentic substance in the narrative of Barsauma’s encounter and theological dispute with the samaritan sage in sebaste. The story, otherwise straightforward—Barsauma wins the dispute, is challenged to give a final proof, and heals the sage’s wife—is interrupted by the samaritan’s objection that he could not take Barsauma’s oil of prayer and apply it to his wife as a remedy: “‘how can i accept oil from you?’ The samaritan protested. ‘it is unlawful for samaritans to deal with Christians’” (§ 80.4).27 it is not just that the samaritan husband should, arguably, have thought better of this ban before asking the saint for help or even before entering into a subtle theological argument with him. But his abrupt statement in fact refers to the strict rule of the samaritan religion that samaritans should not socialize and interact with followers of other religions. although this rule was largely ignored in samaritan communities living in mixed, urban quarters alongside other segments of the population, it was, however, a rule that samaritans, as Christian authors generally recognized, understood as a commandment and abided by much more strictly than even their Jewish brothers or other religious sects.28 Christian visitors to the holy land who crossed samaria were perplexed to observe that “wherever we passed along the streets the samaritans burned away our footprints with straw, whether we were Christians or Jews.” guards outside the villages warned passing Christians not to touch any goods until they had paid for them, and instructed them to put the money into water, since they would not take it straight from the stranger’s hand. and a traveling pilgrim observed that after any such close encounter “[the samaritans] have to purify themselves with water before entering their village or city.”29 our saint—or his hagiographer—reveals further intimate knowledge of samaritan religious doctrine in the second episode about the healing of the boy. The story gives an exceptional glimpse of the saint anyway: the reader is allowed to recognize Barsauma here, in a samaritan village, as a serious theologian who debates difficult and controversial issues.30 But these are specific samaritan positions: one issue of doctrinal contention between Christians, Jews, and samaritans focused on the samaritan denial of the resurrection of the dead, a repeatedly noted element of samaritanism.31 27. for the oil, see Benedikt Kranemann, “Krankenöl,” RAC 21 (2004): 915–65, esp. 931 and 948. 28. Pummer, Early Christian Authors, 350–51. 29. anon. Plac. 8.3; compare epiphanius, Adv. haer. 9.3.6 (p. 201, holl). for these sources as testimonies for samaritan customs, see Pummer, Early Christian Authors, 120–83, in particular 124–27 and 348–51. samaritan sources stress the need for purification after contact with non-samaritans; see Pummer, 125–26. 30. see § 84.1–2, quoted above. 31. see bsanh. 90 b; Qoh. rab. 5.10 (15d); and, for rabbinic criticism, the end of massekhet Kutim. generally on this issue, see ferdinand Dexinger, “samaritan eschatology,” in Crown, The Samaritans, 266–92; Zangenberg, ΣΑΜΑΡΕΙΑ, 129–32; Paul stenhouse, “reflection on samaritan Belief in an afterlife,” in Zsengellér, Samaria, Samarians, Samaritans, 245–60.

136

Johannes Hahn

figure 6.1. mount gerizim with

sanctuary of Jupiter, Tetradrachm, 244–249 c.e., 16.83 g, 28 mm, neapolis, samaria. heritage auctions, march 8–9, 2012, lot 20660. Photograph: heritage auctions.

samaritan emendations of the Bible, adapted to back their strict Pentateuchal theology—this again another fundament of samaritan religion noticed in our text— were considered by rabbis and Christians alike as tampering with the sacred text.32 The remarkable sensitiveness to essential aspects of samaritanism and to crucial lines of debate between samaritans, Jews, and Christians in our two episodes is singular in the Life of Barsauma—singular at least in respect to non-Christian religions and in the body of the first 102 paragraphs of the Life. again, there is a strong ring of authenticity about this characteristic. either the hagiographer or indeed the saint himself had a particular interest in or personal knowledge of samaritanism—perhaps the latter had indeed encountered samaritans on his travels in Palestine and had conversed and debated with them and had—or was believed to have had—some missionary success in samaria. it may be noted that the almost idealizing image of samaritans and of Barsauma’s dealings with them is narrated in episodes that strongly evoke samaritan stories in the new Testament.33 The famous story of the good samaritan (luke 10:25– 37) is embedded in an encounter and theological exchange of a teacher of the law

32. hagith sivan, Palestine in Late Antiquity (oxford: oxford University Press, 2008), 134; John macDonald, The Theology of the Samaritans (london: sCm Press, 1964); Pummer, Early Christian Authors; reinhard Pummer, “The samaritans and Their Pentateuch,” in The Pentateuch as Torah: New Models for Understanding Its Promulgation and Acceptance, ed. gary n. Knoppers and Bernard m. levinson (Winona lake, in: eisenbrauns, 2007), 237–69. 33. samaria, unlike galilee or Judea, does not figure strongly in the new Testament: it is mentioned only once in matthew (10:5–6), three times in luke (9:51–56; 10:25–37; 17:11–19), and four times in John (3:22–30; 4:4–43; 8:48; 11:54).

Samaritans in the Life of Barsauma

137

(nomikos) with Jesus initiated by the former. Barsaumas’s counterpart in his theological debate in samaria is said to be a “samaritan who taught the law” (ho gabro Had shomroyo d-malep nomuso).34 and again, it is the samaritan teacher of the law who approaches the saint who is resting at noon under the shadow of the city’s aqueduct, to have their debate. Jesus’s encounter with the samaritan woman (John 4:1–42) happens on his way from Judea back to galilee: “and he had to pass through samaria. so he came to a town of samaria called sychar, near the field that Jacob had given to his son Joseph. Jacob’s well was there; so Jesus, wearied as he was from his journey, was sitting beside the well. it was about the sixth hour. a woman from samaria came to draw water” (John 4:3–7). Could it really be purely incidental that, besides featuring nomikoi as the counterparts of the two protagonists, secondary narrative details like the time (noon), the protagonist resting, the place (samaria vs. sychem, a village close to gerizim, or the undetermined samaritan village, respectively), and topography (well vs. aqueduct as venue) coincide or resemble each other? This is hardly imaginable, but a series of conscious allusions by the hagiographer is much more plausible. indeed, the encounter at the aqueduct can be read as an artful variatio of the familiar motif occurring in scripture, the encounter at the well.35 The motif of the samaritan woman at the well also belongs to the earliest and very popular new Testament scenes visualized in Christian art.36 likewise, the samaritan’s later protest against Barsauma’s suggested treatment of his sick wife—“‘how can i accept oil from you?’ The samaritan protested. ‘it is unlawful for samaritans to deal with Christians’” (§ 80.4)—takes up the samaritan woman’s objection (and the editorial comment) at the well—“‘how is it that you, a Jew, ask for a drink from me, a woman of samaria?’ (for Jews have no dealings with samaritans).” There can be no doubt that both samaritan episodes in the Life of Barsauma were written, or composed, with a close view to the Jesus tradition in order to lend a greater legitimacy to the syrian saint and to suggest an unquestionable imitatio Christi on his part. still, the remarkable detail of the roman aqueduct at samaria’s city gate unmistakably lends credit to the authenticity, not to say historicity, of the Barsauma episode.

34. literally: “Behold, a certain samaritan man who taught the law.” i thank andrew Palmer for his discussion of the syriac with me. for the episode, see the extensive analysis by martina Böhm, Samarien und die Samaritai bei Lukas (Tübingen: mohr siebeck, 1999). 35. for this episode and more scriptural instances, see now hans förster, “Die Begegnung am Brunnen (Joh 4.4–42) im licht der ‘schrift’: Überlegungen zu den samaritanern im Johannesevangelium,” New Testament Studies 61 (2015): 201–18. 36. Jürgen Zangenberg, “Visual representations: Christianity,” in Religions of the Ancient World: A Guide, ed. sarah Johnston (Cambridge, ma and london: harvard University Press, 2004), 619–21. The motif is, inter alia, found among the wall paintings of the domus ecclesiae in Dura europos.

138

Johannes Hahn s a m a r i Ta n P U Z Z l e s i n T h e L I F E OF BA R S AUM A

however, one central issue of Jesus’s conversation with the samaritan woman—and a cornerstone of samaritan piety throughout history in general—does not appear in the Life of Barsauma at all. although Barsauma travels through central samaria several times and passes important sites and cities there, the Life makes no mention of the holiest of all samaritan places, mount gerizim, in the very neighborhood of samaria, just 9 km southeast of the city and easily visible from there. While in the gospel, the central message of Jesus’s exchange with the samaritan woman is when he tells her of the forthcoming end of the samaritan worship on the gerizim (and of the Jewish cult in Jerusalem), Barsauma, in contrast, ignores the existence of the nearby holy mountain, its meaning for the samaritan faithful, and the sacredness of its soil and of the sanctuary on top of the mountain’s peak. on the main peak of this prominent landmark of samaria, very close to both sebaste and neapolis, and neighboring a large temple city, there was a single samaritan sanctuary, with an impressive architectural complex, which functioned as the center of the monotheistic cult of the samaritans. like the Jewish temple in Jerusalem destroyed in 70 c.e. by the romans, this central sanctuary had been destroyed centuries earlier, in 111/110 b.c.e., by the hasmonean leader John hyrcanus i, and all its cultic structures had been eradicated, without, however, ending the samaritan religious and political focus on mount gerizim. Under hadrian, a temple of Zeus was built on its northern peak, Tell er-ras, and was also a famous landmark figuring on greek imperial coins (fig. 6.1).37 The continuing sacral importance of the area on the main summit, though apparently void of cult buildings, is mirrored in third- to fifth-century inscriptions mentioning samaritan pilgrims.38 samaritan sources deriving from late antiquity suggest that a synagogue was built on mount gerizim under Baba rabba, the

37. for an overview and discussion of the literary sources for the imperial period, see hans g. Kippenberg, Garizim und Synagoge: Traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zur samaritanischen Religion der aramäischen Periode (Berlin: de gruyter, 1971), 96–107. Kippenberg, however, was not able to take into account the important results of the excavations beginning in 1982: Yitzhak magen et al., eds., Mount Gerizim Excavations, I: The Aramaic, Hebrew, and Samaritan Inscriptions; II: A Temple City (Jerusalem: staff officer of archaeology, Civil administration of Judea and samaria, israel antiquities authority, 2004/8). on the stratigraphy and building history of the main summit of mount gerizim, see magen et al., Mount Gerizim Excavations, vol. i, 1–13. see also Yitzhak magen, “mount gerizim and the samaritans,” in mann, Early Christianity in Context, 149–66; ingrid hjelm, “mt. gerizim and samaritans in recent research,” in Samaritans: Past and Present; Current Studies, ed. menahem mor and friedrich V. reiterer (Berlin: de gruyter, 2010), 25–41. 38. magen et al., Mount Gerizim Excavations, vol. I. see also magen, “mount gerizim and the samaritans.”

Samaritans in the Life of Barsauma

139

great samaritan reformer, but no clear archaeological traces of the building have survived.39 Barsauma’s—or the hagiographer’s—lack of interest in the samaritan sacred site is not irrelevant for the discussion of the place of samaritanism in the Life of Barsauma. mount gerizim indeed features prominently in the old Testament and was thus of considerable interest to Christian pilgrims as well.40 Christian sources regularly mention it when reporting on the samaritans and their faith.41 still, this religious landmark apparently had no special significance for Barsauma or his hagiographer, quite in contrast to the site of the Jewish temple in Jerusalem. While the temple in Jerusalem and its permanent destruction had an inestimable meaning for Christian theology as proof of the new covenant and is treated extensively for that reason as a highly disputed sacred place in the Life of Barsauma, the samaritan temple on mount gerizim could be disregarded as a theologically and, more importantly, teleologically irrelevant sanctuary. Thus, although it might have been expected according to the programmatic declaration in the Life (§ 34.1), gerizim is not singled out as a prominent target of Barsauma’s religious violence or as a stop on his itinerary. however, this theological explanation for the disregarding of the single most important sacred physical feature of samaria and samaritanism in the Life of Barsauma fails to bring into focus an even more important dimension of the contemporary religious situation in this area that has, as will be shown later, considerable repercussions for the chronology of the genesis of the Life. in both episodes taking place in the heartland of samaria, and in contrast to other cities and areas Barsauma visits in Palestine and beyond, a tranquil atmosphere prevails, allowing for a climate of peaceful theological debate and religious competition. however, the historical reality in the fourth century, and even more so in the fifth, was quite different, not to say fundamentally different, in this region. samaria and its hinterland, in the wake of the oppression of the Bar Kokhba revolt, were hotly contested among various ethnic and religious groups. While pagan, Jewish, samaritan, and later also Christian neighbors were increasingly embroiled in bitter strife in urban and rural communities alike, the strengthening of the social, political, and religious identity and aspirations of the samaritans in the region was closely 39. samaritan Chronicle ii (ed. Jeremy m. Cohen, A Samaritan Chronicle: A Source-Critical Analysis of the Life and Times of the Great Samaritan Reformer, Baba Rabbah [leiden: Brill, 1981]), § 8.6 (pp. 71–72); Jürgen Zangenberg, “Between Jerusalem and the galilee: samaria in the Time of Jesus,” in Jesus and Archaeology, ed. James h. Charlesworth (grand rapids, mi and Cambridge: eerdmans, 2006), 393–432, 424. 40. abraham entered the Promised land through nearby shechem (genesis 12:6), and gerizim and ebal were the mountains on whose slopes the tribes of israel assembled under Joshua, gerizim being the mount of blessing (Deuteronomy 11:29; 27:11–13; Joshua 8:33–34). 41. see the introduction in this volume.

140

Johannes Hahn

connected with a charismatic but, because of the loss of contemporary samaritan sources, for the modern historian enigmatic, elusive, and largely legendary figure, Baba rabba.42 This samaritan leader is credited with the erection of eight synagogues in villages in samaria (there are no earlier ones attested archaeologically), several in the immediate neighborhood of gerizim,43 and, above all, with the renewal of worship on mount gerizim, where he is said to have established a well of purification and a “house of prayer,” as well as, possibly, a synagogue.44 archaeologically, this rise of samaritanism has left clear traces: new settlements were founded in samaria, synagogues built, and the population grew in size and strength. it appears that the transitional period between the decline of paganism and the emergence of Christianity as the new dominant religion was the phase when samaritans and samaritanism flourished in this region.45 The discontinuation of the pagan temple worship on mount gerizim followed, or was accompanied by, a samaritan resumption of their cult in the traditional sacred area of the main peak. since Christianity at that time was only beginning to expand in samaria, with an obvious initial focus on the area’s cities, including neapolis and sebaste, and their populations, there was no Christian religious interest in mount gerizim at first. and had not Jesus himself predicted the ultimate abandonment of this site of worship (John 4:21)? a fourth-century midrash refers to samaritan worship at gerizim, and both samaritan and Christian sources strongly indicate the existence of a sacred samaritan site there, while the precinct of the Temple mount might still have been desolate. Whether indeed a synagogue may have existed within the sacred precinct at the site, as the sixth-century chronicler John malalas mentions, remains unclear.46

42. he is placed by modern scholarship anywhere between the early third century and the second half of the fourth century: r. T. anderson and T. giles, The Keepers: An Introduction to the History and Culture of the Samaritans (Peabody, ma: hendrickson, 2002), 58–60. see also Cohen, Samaritan Chronicle, 224–38; and sivan, Palestine in Late Antiquity, 108–12. 43. magen, “samaritan synagogues”; Pummer, The Samaritans, 91–112, with an overview of the archaeological evidence. 44. samaritan Chronicle ii, § 8 (pp. 71–72). 45. for the following, see the concise outline by magen, Mount Gerizim Excavations, vol. ii, 246–52. 46. magen, Mount Gerizim Excavations, vol. ii, 246 with the midrash from genesis rabbah 32.10. he argues that the inscriptions dedicated by samaritans with vows and contributions (in one case a gold coin) suggest “that in addition to the sacred precinct, there was some sort of institution—probably priestly—at mt. gerizim, responsible for administration of the site” (247). in addition, one inscription published by magen (no. 7 in Mount Gerizim Excavations, vol. ii, 249 with ill. 337) mentions a sacred place, to hagion, that receives four solidi as donation. John malalas, Chron. 382.21; Procopius, Comm. in Deut. 11.29 (in Pummer, Early Christian Authors, 230–31); Procopius speaks of a naos built by the samaritans. on the tradition of Baba rabbah and his founding of synagogues in samaria and perhaps on gerizim, see above.

Samaritans in the Life of Barsauma

141

given the hagiographer’s agenda, which demands a hero acting in clear-cut and simple contexts, encounters, and confrontations, the reader may not be surprised not to hear anything of the specific, and important, Christian history and contemporary situation in sebaste. he is thus left in the dark with regard to the flourishing Christian community that existed in the city and, from the late fourth century on, in its hinterland.47 and he is equally not reminded of the fact that late antique sebaste, based on a rather late (and controversial) tradition that had John the Baptist having missionized samaria,48 boasted that it was the burial place of the Baptist, next to prophets elisha’s and obadiah’s tombs, and had a sanctuary with the Baptist’s remains. for that reason sebaste was, already in the course of the fourth century, a first-rank Christian pilgrimage destination.49 Under Julian the apostate, local pagans in their fight against Christianity stormed John the Baptist’s church, defiled his tomb (as well as those of elisha and obadiah), got hold of the precious relics, and desecrated them by mixing them with unclean animal bones, then burning them, and finally scattering the ashes.50 Thus, not only religious competition but open religiously motivated violence had ruled the city in the later fourth century, even when it was restricted to pagans and Christians. There is no reason to assume that samaritans participated in anti-Christian unrest. not surprisingly, many inhabitants of the city’s population were still pagans; the local population, as at so many other places in samaria, was mixed, with samaritans only one group. however, Barsauma’s and his hagiographer’s sebaste and its population are entirely samaritan, as is the samaritan village envisaged in the other episode discussed.51 a na lY Z i n g a hag io g r a P h e r’ s si l e n C e

methodologically, to examine a hagiographic source for what it does not offer or possibly passes over in silence, and to draw conclusions from any such negative evidence, is obviously hazardous. still, our observations on the relevance of mount gerizim in the later imperial period and on the troubled religious history of

47. Bellarmino Bagatti, Antichi villaggi cristiani di Samaria (Jerusalem: franciscan Printing Press, 1979), 60–72. 48. for the traditions that connect John the Baptist to samaria and have him buried in sebaste, see Joshua schwartz, “John the Baptist, the Wilderness, and the samarian mission,” in Studies in Historical Geography and Biblical Historiography Presented to Zeccharia Kallai, ed. gershon galil and moshe Weinfeld (leiden: Brill, 2000), 104–17, esp. 115–17 with the sources and discussion. 49. Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrims, 344–45 with references. 50. Passio artemii 57b = Philost. Vii 4a: 80.30–35. 51. The picture given in the Life of Barsauma is thus very similar to the “description” of rabbat moab: here too the hagiographer sketches, contrary to historical reality, an entirely pagan society; see stemberger in this volume.

142

Johannes Hahn

samaria in the later fourth century—both ignored by the Life—will form part of an argument that aims at contributing to the key question of dating the genesis of the Life of Barsauma. so far, we could show that the Life gives an almost idealized image of samaritans and of Barsauma’s dealings with them, in peaceful contexts, even stylizing Barsauma as a Christian missionary among the samaritan population. The Life demonstrates a remarkable awareness of primary features of samaritan theology and social praxis, very much in contrast to the kind of information reported about Jews and pagans in much more numerous relevant episodes in the Life. however, at the same time, the Life conceals the coexistence, competition, and complicated mutual relations of various religious and ethnic groups in contemporary Palestine for the sake of presenting Barsauma as a Christian ascetic hero in a still-hostile holy land. and this silence is analytically relevant, in particular because important historical transformations in samaria and Palestine remain equally unreflected in the Life’s narrative. it appears that Barsauma and, even more importantly, his hagiographer lacked historical knowledge, or the benefit of retrospective hindsight, of significant forthcoming Palestinian events: an awareness of these momentous historical events would have altered their opinion of and attitude toward samaritans and samaritanism so fundamentally that a perspective on samaritans as taken in the Life would have been simply impossible to choose. such a conclusion, however, if correct, must have far-ranging repercussions for the discussion of the time of origin of our hagiographic source.52 Barsauma did not live to see the eventual breakdown of peaceful samaritanChristian coexistence in samaria and beyond. These events took place many years after the putative date of his travels through Palestine. it is only later, in the second half of the fifth century, when samaritans were increasingly marginalized and antagonized by imperial legislation,53 that the precarious relations of the two religious groups exploded in the samarian heartland and in neighboring regions with strong samaritan minorities, and turned into hostility and bloodshed, clearly primarily ignited by unrelenting Christian zeal to take possession of all biblical places and remains. already under Theodosius ii initial attempts, recorded in samaritan sources, were made to retrieve the bones of Joseph from shechem near neapolis.54 52. see arguments on this central issue in the present volume in the conclusion in this volume. 53. for legal developments, political background, church historical contexts, and the resulting samaritan rebellions, see alfredo m. rabello, “The samaritans in Justinian’s Corpus iuris Civilis,” Israel Law Review 31 (1997): 724–43; alan D. Crown, “The Byzantine and moslem Period,” in Crown, The Samaritans, 68–73; sivan, Palestine in Late Antiquity, 113–42. 54. Kitab al Tarikh of abu’l fath, tr. P. stenhouse (sydney, 1985), 236–37 (as quoted in sivan, Palestine in Late Antiquity, 114): “in the days of the high priest eleazar the Christians came and laid waste to the field of Joseph’s tomb. They said that they wanted to take the remains of Joseph the patriarch away. They began to excavate.” (several miracles could not stop them.) “Then the Christians came and put up a building over the grave which the samaritans then demolished. They then took seven people from

Samaritans in the Life of Barsauma

143

in 450/1 a new attempt to discover sacred patriarchal relics was made and a search undertaken at awerta, the traditional burial place of the samaritan elite, for the bones of the old Testament priests eleazar, ithamar, and Pinhas—an episode again reported only in a samaritan chronicle.55 The final explosion and outburst of violence happened exactly in the area Barsauma had visited, coinciding with, and partly connected to, bloody conflicts between Christian groups in the wake of Chalcedon, the bitter strife between Palestinian partisans and opponents of the Chalcedonian “orthodoxy” and the struggle for episcopal power in Jerusalem between Juvenal and the non-Chalcedonian monk Theodosius in which samaritans became involved. samaritan soldiers were led against anti-Chalcedonian monks in neapolis, killing many of them, and were later accused at the imperial court of having “committed terrible and lawless deeds against the most holy churches and murders or some other unnatural sins.”56 The events of 454 were a precursor of the great samaritan revolt of 484. neither causes nor chronology or extent can be discussed here. it must suffice to highlight the cruelty of the violence perpetrated by all participants, which is bitterly recalled by both Christian and samaritan sources. The historian Procopius, himself a local from nearby Caesarea, narrates the outbreak of violence with the following words: During the reign of Zeno, the samaritans suddenly banded together and fell upon the Christians in neapolis in the church while they were celebrating the festival called the Pentecost, and they destroyed many of them, striking by sword Terebinthius, the man who was then the city’s bishop whom they found standing at the holy table performing the mysteries. The samaritans slashed at him, cutting off the fingers from his hand. They also railed at the mysteries, as is natural for samaritans to do, while we honour them with silence.57

further atrocities occurred in Caesarea, again focusing on the local church, which was burnt down, and aimed at clergy and Christian faithful, many of whom were murdered. The imperial reaction to the uprising, after the defeat of the samaritans in battle, comprised, according to the samaritan tradition, retaliatory measures and

among them and executed them. so they then seized the high priest eleazar and leaders of the hukama and hanged them.” The samaritans claimed to be descendants of the tribe of Joseph: James D. Purvis, “Joseph in the samaritan Tradition,” in Studies on the Testament of Moses, ed. george W. e. nickelsburg (missoula, mT: society of Biblical literature, 1975), 147–53. 55. Kitab al Tarikh of abu’l fath, tr. P. stenhouse (sydney, 1985), 238–39 (as quoted in sivan, Palestine in Late Antiquity, 115): “after this, during the reign of marcian war broke out between the samaritans and the Christians over the tombs of the high priests eleazar, ithamar and Phineas—peace be upon them— for the Christians wanted to take them from the samaritans.” see also Crown, The Samaritans, 70. 56. ACO ii.1.2, 127, ll. 15–16 (as quoted in Pummer, Early Christian Authors, 233 n. 10). 57. Procopius, Aedific. 5.7.5–8 (loeb trans.).

144

Johannes Hahn

punishment, including the public mass executions of members of the samaritan elite and priesthood, death by burning or being crushed to death, forcible conversions, the confiscation of synagogues, and the banishment of all samaritans from mount gerizim.58 Zeno completed the deliberate destruction and usurpation of the material and spiritual basis of samaritanism with the erection of a church on the site of the former samaritan temple, which he dedicated to mary Theotokos, thus, in an unequivocal way, symbolically fulfilling Jesus’s aforementioned prophecy of the end of samaritan worship (John 4:21–23) by converting the mountain precinct into a Christian holy place.59 Procopius, fully aware of the emperor’s theological and teleological intentions in his account, spins his record of events of 484 into a history of the mountain precinct, not of an abortive revolt.60 mount gerizim, passed over in silence by Barsauma and his hagiographer, is given a central place in Procopius’s narrative. The subsequent samaritan uprising of 529 was ignited again by religious provocation, this time by young Christians in Caesarea who assaulted samaritan synagogues. messianic expectations fueled organized samaritan resistance and their political uprising and led to the burning of churches and the killing of many Christians around neapolis and Caesarea. again, religious atrocities characterized the eruption of intracommunal conflicts.61 it is not necessary to follow all these events further, events that culminated, once more, in an extremely brutal repression of the revolt by the roman government, this time, according to our sources, almost annihilating the samaritan people.62 The crucial aspect of this inexorably escalat58. Kitab al Tarikh of abu’l fath, tr. P. stenhouse (sydney, 1985), 239–41. The samaritan Chronicle’s narrative is quoted in full by sivan, Palestine in Late Antiquity, 121–22. 59. Procopius, Aedific. 5.7.7–8 (loeb trans.): “The emperor Zeno . . . drove out the samaritans from mount gerizim and straightaway handed it over to the Christians, and building a church on the summit he dedicated it to the mother of god, putting a barrier, as it was made to appear, around this church, though in reality he erected only a light wall of stone. and he established a garrison of soldiers, placing a large number in the city below, but not more than ten men at the fortifications and the church.” 60. sivan, Palestine in Late Antiquity, 123; and Yitzhak magen, “The Church of mary Theotokos on mount gerizim,” in Christian Archaeology in the Holy Land: New Discoveries; Essays in Honor of Virgilio G. Corbo, ed. giovanni C. Borrini, leah Di segni, and eugenio alliata (Jerusalem: franciscan Printing Press, 1990), 333–42. 61. Cyril, a native of scythopolis and important source for the samaritan revolt, records the pillaging and burning of churches, the torturing and killing of Christians, and the region of neapolis as a focal point of the uprising. he also reports the circumstances of the murder of the local clergy there (V. Sabae 70): “Then the samaritans slaughtered bishop mamônas of neapolis and, seizing and butchering some priests, roasted them together with remains of holy martyrs. They performed many such acts, so that the so-called imperial highroads became unusable and impassable for the Christians.” Cyril, however, also reports the death of the samaritan imperial dignitary silvanus, who, when visiting scythopolis, “was seized by the Christians and burnt in the middle of the city” (tr. richard m. Price, Cyril of Scythopolis: The Lives of the Monks of Palestine [Kalamazoo, mi: Cistercian Publications, 1990], 181–82). 62. The very last samaritan uprising a generation later, in 555/6, can be omitted here. for an account and analysis, see sivan, Palestine in Late Antiquity, 125–42.

Samaritans in the Life of Barsauma

145

ing confrontation is that the extent of periodic bloodshed and ritualized religious violence in all these conflicts, the repeated wholesale destruction of lives and places of worship on all sides, inevitably obliterated the basis for peaceful coexistence between Christians and samaritans. Within a few generations after Barsauma’s journeys through Palestine, the religious situation and atmosphere there had so drastically and irrevocably changed that nothing was left that could have recalled or allowed for a peaceful encounter and theological dispute between a Christian ascetic and the local samaritan population. This terse survey conveys a key message for the discussion of the presumably most enigmatic problem regarding the Life of Barsauma: its date of composition, its origin, and its Redaktionsgeschichte. in the light of the background and facts set out above it is inconceivable that the samaritan episodes in the Life could have been written down after the breakdown and bloody escalation of Christiansamaritan relations in Palestine. The idealistic image of samaritans and of Barsauma’s dealings with them cannot have originated from after the great samaritan revolts in Palestine of the years 484, 529, and 555/6. The two samaritan episodes, in § 80 and § 84, predate the composition of the original Life of Barsauma (comprising §§ 1–102). assuming that the saint’s third journey to Palestine may be dated to ca. 435–438,63 the hagiographic episodes in question must belong to the early material in the Life, indeed originating from Barsauma’s lifetime. apparently, they were left practically untouched in the process of later selection, incorporation, and redaction. The disastrous developments in Palestine after the middle of the fifth century neither led to their exclusion nor did they prompt a recognizable revision. The editorial summaries or rubrics in §§ 4 and 34, on the other hand, date to later, perhaps much later. They claim, in the context of a synoptic characterization of the universal hostility Barsauma had to face in the east, and of his miraculous deeds in overcoming any resistance and in subduing or humiliating all non-Christian and dissenting believers, that Barsauma destroyed samaritan synagogues in his religious crusade on his way through Palestine64—a claim, however, that is contrary to the narrative evidence preserved in the Life. 63. for a possible chronology, see andrew Palmer, “a Tale of Two synods: The archimandrite Barsumas at ephesus in 449 and at Chalcedon in 451,” Journal of Eastern Christian Studies 66 (2014): 49f. 64. § 4: The first distinction. “it occurred to the young Barsauma that he ought to make a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. . . . now at that time pagans abounded in Palestine, Phoenicia, and arabia. Christians were as yet few in number in those countries. The Jews and the samaritans, on the other hand, were rich. They persecuted the Christians of that region.” § 34 The twenty-sixth distinction. This heading is followed by the retrospective historical summary—a later editorial addition, possibly by the redactor who composed the Life as it has come down to us—(1) “so Barsauma set off for Jerusalem. When he reached Phoenicia, arabia, and Palestine, he began to demolish the Jewish sabbath-houses, destroy the samaritan synagogues, and burn down the pagan temples. When he had prayed in Jerusalem, he traveled on to mount sinai by the road of the wilderness. (2) now the pagan population of that region was at that time still dominant. it was they who held the cities.”

146

Johannes Hahn

Provided that the argument set out here is right—namely, that the Life’s two samaritan episodes represent early material on Barsauma, deriving from and recounting, with hagiographic embellishment, presumably authentic encounters in samaria—and that this material in the Life’s later editing process experienced no substantial revision, another conclusion is inevitable, and this affects the Life as a whole. in the light of the results drawn from the analysis of the samaritan episodes, it is not possible to dismiss, from the outset, episodes contained in the Life as simply conventional, grossly distorted or, on the whole, as later inventions and void of any historical substance at all. nor may the Life of Barsauma be dismissed as an obviously fictitious text altogether. True, as other contributions to this volume convincingly show, several stories and even more details are not trustworthy, and some are demonstrably false; others can hardly be anything else than invented or inspired by another’s saint exemplum and then ascribed to our saint too. nonetheless, the original kernel of one or the other tradition may be hidden to us, its echo no longer audible or decipherable. in the case of the samaritan episodes, indications—like the aqueduct of sebaste—can be pinpointed, others identified as plausible. The conclusion that has to be drawn from this is that, ideally, every single episode and detail has to be scrutinized and analyzed in order to decode a potentially relevant meaning, relevant beyond the purely hagiographic message, and to uncover it from later reworking or from under layers of hagiographic additions and revision. That a large part that has to be considered fictitious will still remain is beyond question. in the case of the samaritan episodes, it should be noted that these do not really fit well in the overall agenda of the Life, with a hero tirelessly battling in a hostile world; indeed, they follow their own agenda. The friendly attitude toward his samaritan counterparts, Barsauma’s obvious missionary drive, the surprising focus on theological issues and the saint’s argumentation, and so on suggest an independent source and approach. While there never existed an imperial program of conversion toward the Jews, attempts to win over samaritans to the Christian faith were not infrequent in the late fourth and fifth centuries.65 These peaceful attempts, of course, came to an abrupt end with the outbreak of the samaritan revolts later in the fifth century. The Life’s samaritan passages may perhaps not really add new substance to our knowledge of late antique samaritanism and samaritan theology or of the history of this important ethnic and religious group in Palestine in this critical phase of its life. still, there is no other hagiographic source going back to the fifth century that pays as much attention to the samaritans, their beliefs, and their way of life as the Life of Barsauma and indirectly gives

65. see the instances quoted above.

Samaritans in the Life of Barsauma

147

“historical” information on them by singling them out, unlike pagans and Jews, as worthy targets of Christian conversion efforts.66 a f i na l s C e n e

not long before the hagiographer, in § 102, announces the end of the original Life of Barsauma, he depicts a beautiful scene in Jerusalem and ascribes it, of course, to the charitable influence of the saint. in the holy City, soon after the final showdown between Barsauma, the Jews, and eudocia, a great tremor and a violent earthquake occur, and the grace of god unexpectedly saves everybody in the city—Christians, Jews, samaritans, and pagans alike. The narrative continues: “But the Christian people praised god with the voice of thanksgiving; and they constituted choirs, each tongue singing in its own tongue and praising god: romans, syrians, greeks, arabs, Persians, Palestinians and egyptians. many people’s songs of praise mingled with one another” (§ 96.10). This colorful vignette immediately reminds the reader of the fact that Palestine and the near east were, in late antiquity, filled with contradictory voices—latin, greek, hebrew, aramaic, georgian, Coptic, and others. These, like the pagans, Jews, samaritans, and Christians, coexisted, mingled with one another, and conversed with each other. This historical reality, although illuminated for a short moment in the passage quoted, is indubitably not reflected in the Life of Barsauma at all. its author has a painfully limited outlook, strictly separating the various groups, especially along religious lines. These groups are described as facing each other almost irreconcilably. There is no mingling among them. Just a single Jewish ship-captain can be found who, as part of his profession, joins or meets followers of another religious calling: Barsauma and his monks are passengers on his boat on the way from Cyprus to Palestine (§ 79.2). This, at the same time, is the background for the presentation of the samaritans by Barsauma’s hagiographer. however, the samaritans, although they are envisaged as living apart from the rest of the population in separate communities, are the one major non-Christian religious group in the region that is addressed—or presented—as open to theological argument. not only single persons but families and large groups can be won over to the Christian creed. They are receptive to missionary efforts, a trait that is attested in contemporary records and historical 66. in the sixth century we have the remarkable collection Lives of the Monks of Palestine by Cyril of scythopolis (near samaria), which contains, in its Vita Sabae (70), a highly important excursus (referred to above) on the samaritan revolt of 529. The Life of Jacob the monk, describing in its first part events that took place in Porphyreon and its vicinity, mentions samaritan conversions and expulsions of samaritans from the city and possibly dates to the early sixth century; Pummer, Early Christian Authors, 326–31.

148

Johannes Hahn

accounts as well. in our hagiographic source, the Life of Barsauma, this does not, of course, happen through the word of the saint alone but requires support from powerful miracles as well: typically these are healing miracles (both the samaritans’ souls and bodies have to be saved). Yet, unlike pagans or Jews, the samaritans do not need terrifying miracles or natural disasters (or their removal by the saint) to convince them of the invincibility and superiority of the Christian faith. They are portrayed as natural targets of Christian missionary efforts. i have tried to show that this hagiographic atmosphere of modest tolerance, of peaceful theological dispute, when considered against the background of the historical developments in Palestine, in particular the growing religious polarization and violent conflict between Christians and samaritans and the bloody revolts of the latter, can only be understood under the assumption that the two samaritan episodes (and possibly the main body of the Life, the first 102 paragraphs) were written down before the religious atmosphere in Palestine exploded, and bloodshed took over the public agenda. This first body of the Barsauma tradition must have been set down and established in a substantial first, and possibly much less embellished, version than the one we have in hand, soon after Barsauma’s death in 456—that is, within a generation or roughly a quarter of a century after that date. This is to me the most important conclusion that can be drawn from the close analysis of the perception and presentation of the samaritans in the Life of Barsauma.

7

Wandering monks remembered Hagiography in the lives of Alexander the Sleepless and Barsauma the Mourner Daniel f. Caner

sometime early in the fifth century Bishop rabbula of edessa alerted his colleague gemellinus, bishop of Perrhē in euphratensis, about the behavior of certain monks living in his vicinity. “i have heard,” wrote rabbula, “that in your own place of Perrhē some of the brethren, whose dwellings are not known, as well as others among the renown heads of the monasteries,” boasted that they subsisted solely on the body and blood of Christ, which they obtained each day by consuming large quantities of the eucharist prepared with plenty of leavening and salt. it was their practice, when “travelling from place to place or going on an extended journey,” [to] satisfy the hunger and thirst of their nature from the same body of our lord two or three times on a single day. [Then, having reached] where they are journeying, in the evening, they again offer the oblation and take from it as if fasting.

according to rabbula, this boast was meant to “win the admiration of simple persons.” But it was all a ruse: after eating the oblations, the monks allegedly gorged on cheese and egg-cakes, then guzzled down goats’ milk to cool all the wine they had drunk “in the name of the sacrament.” rabbula complains that he did “not know what kind of monks” these were. finding no precedent among old Testament prophets, new Testament apostles, or Christian monks that he knew, he concludes that they had devised these contrivances themselves, “for the sake of vanity” rather than the “afflictions of asceticism.”1 1. rabbula of edessa, ap. Ps.-Zacharias, Chron. 10.4, tr. (adapted) robert r. Phenix Jr. and Cornelia B. horn, The Chronicle of Pseudo-Zachariah Rhetor: Church and War in Late Antiquity, ed. geoffrey greatrex, Translated Texts for historians 55 (liverpool: liverpool University Press, 2011), 403–12.

149

150

Daniel F. Caner

Perrhē was located 100 km north of edessa in the western foothills of nemrut Dagˇ. Whether or not the monks who troubled rabbula were members of Barsauma’s monastery on nemrut Dagˇ,2 his letter reminds us that the late roman province of euphratensis, situated at the intersection of syria, mesopotamia, armenia, and the headwaters of the euphrates, was a frontier of astonishing Christian innovation in the fifth century, home to ascetic virtuosi whose devotional pursuits went well beyond pillar standing. it also shows that even local bishops were sometimes confounded when trying to classify these experiments according to traditional models, as well as the probable result: failing to fit such behavior into acceptable biblical or monastic paradigms, rabbula dismisses its practitioners as deceptive, venal, and vain.3 no other account exists of their apparent effort to subsist solely on divine food. What these monks needed was a good hagiographer. That was the fortune of two of their contemporaries, the heroic Barsauma (d. 456) and alexander the sleepless (i.e., akoimētos, d. ca. 430/5).4 although there is no evidence that these monks knew each other, alexander and Barsauma had remarkably similar careers. Both trained on the banks of the euphrates in the early fifth century. Both rejected cenobitic conventions to devise their own signature disciplines: alexander a regimen of never-ending prayer, Barsauma of ever-standing prayer. Both became archimandrites of monasteries whose members regularly embarked on travels, 2. arthur Vööbus, “solution du problème de l’auteur de la ‘lettre à gemellinus, évêque de Perrhé,’ ” L’ Orient Syrien 7 (1962): 297–306, notes that Rules of John of Tella 14 censures similar practices; for earlier precedents see andrew mcgowan, Ascetic Eucharists: Food and Drink in Early Christian Ritual Meals, oxford early Christian studies (oxford: oxford University Press, 1999). nonetheless, v. Bars. 10.1 states that Barsauma abstained from bread, water, and wine, and in 12.1–3 favorably mentions gemellinus. for the location of Perrhē (Pirun or adıyaman, Turkey), see richard J. a. Talbert, Barrington Atlas of the Greek and Roman World (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000), map 67, g1. 3. georg Blum, Rabbula von Edessa: Der Christ, der Bischof, der Theologe, CsCo 300, subsidia 34 (louvain: secrétariat du CorpussCo, 1969), 121–22; for parallels, see Daniel Caner, “from the Pillar to the Prison: Penitential spectacles in early Byzantine monasticism,” in Ascetic Culture: Essays in Honor of Philip Rousseau, ed. Blake leyerle and robin Darling Young (notre Dame, in: notre Dame University Press, 2013), 127–46. on ridicule as a rhetorical strategy against monastic opponents, see michael gaddis, There Is No Crime for Those Who Have Christ: Religious Violence in the Roman Empire, Transformation of the Classical heritage 39 (Berkeley, los angeles, and london: University of California Press, 2006). 4. for greek vita (Bhg 47), see La vie d’Alexandre l’Acémète: Texte grec et traduction latine, ed. Émile de stoop (Po 6.5 (Turnhout: Brepols, 1980), 645–704; tr. Caner, Wandering, Begging Monks, 249–80. i thank Johannes hahn and Volker menze for providing an opportunity to reacquaint myself with this vita; my new observations are limited to its provenance and purpose. for alexander’s death, ca. 430–435, see Caner, Wandering, Begging Monks, 129–33. some erroneously date it ca. 405, apparently based on v. Alex. Acoem. 13, where rabbula, who died in 435/6, describes one of alexander’s miracles “thirty years after [it] had happened and the holy man had died.” This, however, only indicates that the author thought the miracle occurred ca. 405; other episodes (e.g., alexander’s presence in antioch during Theodotus’s episcopate, 420/1–429) demonstrate knowledge that he lived after that.

Wandering Monks Remembered

151

confronting, challenging, or denouncing many religious, military, and civil leaders they encountered along the way. These practices made both notorious, as we know from fifth-century sources (conciliar acta from ephesus ii and Chalcedon, writings by the monk nilus of ancyra) that enable us to see these monks as many contemporaries did: Barsauma the butcher of bishops, alexander the teacher of sloth.5 Yet both found hagiographers who artfully shaped a positive remembrance of them and their careers. in Barsauma’s case, the result was a hagiographic masterpiece that transformed a violent ascetic zealot into a saint of remarkable power, capable of channeling god’s blessings toward whoever believed in him and perpetuated his cult. it is safe to say that alexander and Barsauma would not have been remembered in history as anything other than rogue monks had they not found hagiographers able to make sense of them as ascetic saints. Theodoret of Cyrrhus (393-ca. 466) mentions neither in his Religious History. Written in greek ca. 444, this famous text portrays thirty syrian male and female monks who lived east of antioch before and during Theodoret’s lifetime, including two who appear in the Life of Barsauma, simeon stylites (§§ 31, 46–47) and Jacob of Cyrrhestica (§ 90). Theodoret’s omission of Barsauma and alexander from this series cannot be explained merely on doctrinal grounds.6 a likely explanation is that their ascetic behavior did not fit the paradigm that guided his selection. That was the paradigm of the contemplative philosopher. Theodoret’s work is remarkable for its extensive use of old and new Testament typologies to scripturalize his ascetic subjects.7 Yet perhaps more striking is his presentation of nearly every monk as a master of “philosophy,” nearly every monastery as a “schoolhouse” or “think tank.”8 Theodoret applied these descriptions—arguably the unifying leitmotif of his work—to unlettered monks whether they wrapped themselves in chains, enclosed themselves in boxes, or, in simeon’s case, stood atop pillars. however incongruous and implausible this interpretation might seem, what mattered to Theodoret was a monk’s dedication to 5. for accusations against alexander, see Caner, Wandering, Begging Monks, 137–49; and below. 6. on Theodoret’s selections, see Pierre Canivet, “Théodoret et le messalianisme,” Revue Mabillon 51 (1961): 26–34; Canivet, Le monachisme syrien selon Théodoret de Cyr (Théologie historique 42 (Paris: Beauchesne, 1977), 75–76; and Theresa Urbainczyk, Theodoret of Cyrrhus: The Bishop and the Holy Man (ann arbor, mi: University of michigan Press, 2002). 7. Derek Krueger, “Typological figuration in Theodoret of Cyrrhus’s religious history and the art of Postbiblical narrative,” Journal of Early Christian Studies 5.3 (1997): 393–419; and Krueger, Writing and Holiness: The Practice of Authorship in the Early Christian East (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004), 33–62. 8. Philosophia and its cognates occur seventy-eight times, applied to all but three ascetics; phrontestērion fourteen times, all to cenobia. for philosophy as a monastic paradigm, see s. rubenson, “monasticism and the Philosophical heritage,” in The Oxford Handbook of Late Antiquity, ed. scott Johnson (oxford and new York: oxford University Press, 2012), 487–512.

152

Daniel F. Caner

isolation and apparent effort to attain a state of hēsychia, or contemplative tranquility, by breaking down distractions of the body.9 This conceptualization of Christian monasticism was not unusual in the fourth and fifth centuries. nonetheless its prominence in the Religious History betrays Theodoret’s apologetic desire to show greek readers that at least some of the rural monks of euphratensis shared the contemplative, philosophical values of the classical Christian tradition.10 alexander and Barsauma did not easily fit into that conceptual framework. although both spent significant periods in isolated locations and prayer, their careers show them to have been a type of monk that seventh-century syrian tradition called mshannyanē: “wandering monks” to us, deadbeats to critics, perhaps “walking men” to fellow enthusiasts. at the high end, such virtuosi tended to combine an uncompromising commitment to ascetic poverty with an impulse to edify or comfort people with spiritual knowledge and powers of prayer—all of which could make them controversial.11 neither alexander nor Barsauma left writings explaining 9. Theodoret, Ep. 28 (Correspondence, ed. azéma, 1:89) describes monasticism as the pursuit of ἡσυχία, as he also does in Historia religiosa pr. 5; 1.2; 2.13, 17; 3.12; 4.5; 6.4, 7, 8; 8.7, 8; 9.12; 11.2; 19.1, 3; 21.15, 16, 32; 29.3. on his difficulty of squaring simeon to a classical framework, see susan a. harvey, “The sense of a stylite: Perspectives on symeon the elder,” Vigiliae Christianae 42 (1988): 376–94. 10. Theodoret’s first major work, the Therapeutic of Hellenic Maladies (ca. 420–422), argued that Christian ascesis trumped that of pagan philosophers: see Yannis Papadogiannakis, Christianity and Hellenism in the Fifth-Century Greek East: Theodoret’s Apologetics against the Greeks in Context, hellenic studies 49 (Washington, DC: Center for hellenic studies, Trustees for harvard University Press, 2012, 98–105. for apologetic intent in his historia religiosa, see Canivet, Le monachisme syrien, 67–68; and Cristian-nicolae gaşpar, “an oriental in greek Dress: The making of a Perfect Christian Philosopher in the Philotheos Historia of Theodoret of Cyrrhus,” Annual of Medieval Studies at CEU 14 (2008): 193–229. Theodoret’s cultural identification was greek and not syrian Christian: see fergus millar, “Theodoret of Cyrrhus: a syrian in greek Dress?,” in From Rome to Constantinople: Studies in Honour of Averil Cameron, ed. hagit amirav and Bas ter haar romeny, late antique history and religion 19 (leuven: Peeters, 2007), 105–25; and henning lehmann, Students of the Bible in 4th and 5th century Syria: Seats of Learning, Sidelights, and Syriacisms (aarhus: aarhus University Press, 2008), 187–211. richard Price, History of the Monks of Syria (Kalamazoo, mi: Cistercian Publications, 1985), xxxiii-iv, notes that Theodoret is less helpful as an expositor of syrian asceticism than is often assumed. 11. Mshannyanē appears in enanisho’s seventh-century translation of Apophth. patr., series alph. Bessarion 12, in Paradisus patrum, ed. Paul Bedjan, Acta martyrum et sanctorum 7 (Paris: harassowitz, 1897), 907; see antoine guillaumont, “le dépaysement comme forme d’ascèse dans l monachisme ancien,” Annuaire—École Pratique des Hautes Études: Section des Sciences Religieuses 76 (1968–69): 55 n. 3. i take the translation “walking men” from Peter Brown, The Body and Society: Men, Women, and Sexual Renunciation in Early Christianity, lectures on the history of religions 13 (new York: Columbia University Press, 1988), 87. on such monasticism, see guillaumont, “le dépaysement”; Philippe escolan, Monachisme et église: Le monachisme syrien du IVe au VIIe siècle; Un ministère charismatique, Théologie historique 109 (Paris: Beauchesne, 1999); Caner, Wandering, Begging Monks; and more broadly, Peter Brown, Treasures in Heaven: The Holy Poor in Early Christianity (Charlottesville and london: University of Virginia Press, 2016). “Wandering” in ancient sources is almost always a polemical description. few people ever move without a purpose, except in the imagination of others, where a perception of unwanted intrusiveness or material dependency is usually implicit.

Wandering Monks Remembered

153

what drove them on. for that we must rely on hagiographers who sought to explain alexander and Barsauma by placing their apparent vagrancy and occasional violence within accepted frameworks. Yet not all hagiographies are the same, and these two “walking men” are represented quite differently by their hagiographers. Whereas the Life of Alexander depicts alexander as an apostolic figure whose authority and regimen stemmed from specific scriptural passages, the Life of Barsauma depicts Barsauma as a monastic confessor whose authority and miraculous powers stemmed from a regimen of transformative ascetic hardships. The representations and interpretive strategies by which the Life of Alexander and Life of Barsauma turned their subjects into saints are the subject of my contribution to this volume. Both texts are presented as a “remembrance” (mnēmosynē, ‘uhdānā; v. Alex. Acoem. 4, § 164.1) written by a younger disciple, but in neither case do we know anything for certain about the date or circumstance of the text’s composition. Both might date to the fifth century; the Life of Alexander was written in greek, but its author seems to have known syriac and (like author of the Life of Barsauma) may have written in the syrian milieu of osrhoene or euphratensis. These texts present, however, two different paradigms of monastic life: in the Life of Alexander, an “apostolic” paradigm based primarily on new Testament models emphasizing provision of spiritual edification in return for salvation and material support; in the Life of Barsauma, a “penitential” paradigm based primarily on old Testament models emphasizing endurance of physical affliction in return for divine approval and spiritual relief. “apostolic” and “penitential” are my own categories. neither was as sharply delineated in practice as i have described them, but neither had much to do either with the philosophical pursuit of tranquility espoused by Theodoret and others.12 indeed, one reason for discussing the Life of Alexander and Life of Barsauma together is to show that these two alternative paradigms existed alongside (and competed with) Theodoret’s philosophical model. Both were current in syria when alexander and Barsauma were active. it is clear, however, that by then apostolic asceticism was in decline while penitential asceticism was ascendant.13 setting questions of 12. all three emphasized spiritual tranquility but differed in practices used to attain it: at the risk of oversimplifying, the philosophical emphasized “mind over matter,” the others “mind through matter.” Cf. criticisms of ascetics who wore chains: Theodoret, Hist. rel. 10, with harvey, “The sense of a stylite,” 376–94,; and the next note. 13. for the origin and decline of the apostolic paradigm, see Caner, Wandering, Begging Monks; for the ascendancy of the penitential, Caner, “from the Pillar to the Prison,” 127–46; matthias henze, The Madness of King Nebuchadnezzar: The Ancient Near Eastern Origins and Early History of Interpretation of Daniel 4 (leiden: Brill, 1999); and irénée hausherr, Penthos: La doctrine de la componction dans l’orient chrétien, orientalia Christiana analecta 132 (rome: Pont. institutum studiorum orientalium, 1944). in practice the two might resemble each other. for example, the syriac Book of Steps—the most important document for the apostolic paradigm—emphasizes acquiring humility through physical sufferings, as was central to the pentitential paradigm. in 29.3 it maintains that Jesus and the apostles also wore sackcloth!

154

Daniel F. Caner

historicity aside, however, i shall argue that the different choices these hagiographers made in representing their monastic subjects stemmed as much from differences in their apologetic and commemorative projects as from actual differences in their subject’s ascetic practices or purposes. here i follow samuel rubenson’s observations regarding depictions of ascetic poverty and wandering by desert solitaries in fourth-century egypt. Pointing out that almost all of these were produced in Palestinian monasteries of fifth- or sixthcentury gaza, rubenson proposes that they tell us more about the concerns of this later gazan cenobitic milieu than about any early anchorite.14 many narratives follow a pattern in which journeying deep into the desert eventually results in discovery of “true monks” living in complete tranquility in remote oases, subsisting on divinely supplied fruits or bread.15 such fantasies are exactly what we might expect to find written for a philosophical ascetic milieu like that of gaza, where cenobites were expected to strive to emulate solitaries who practiced hēsychia in remote, outside cells while subsisting on bread rations supplied by their cenobium.16 likewise the depictions of Barsauma’s wanderings and hardships correspond to conventions found in certain cenobitic communities from the late fifth century onward. That cannot be said, however, for practices ascribed to alexander the sleepless, whose apostolic career i review first. a l e X a n D e r a n D T h e a P o s T o l iC Pa r a D ig m

Born ca. 370 to a wealthy family in the aegean islands, alexander received an advanced education at Constantinople before embarking on a career in the imperial bureaucracy. according to his hagiographer his plans changed, however, after

14. samuel rubenson, “Power and Politics of Poverty in early monasticism,” in Prayer and Spirituality in the Early Church, vol. 5, Poverty and Riches, ed. geoffrey D. Dunn and David luckensmeyer and lawrence Cros (strathfield, nsW: st. Pauls Publications, 2009), 91–110. rubenson criticizes my use of apophthegmata patrum to reconstruct “egyptian” desert tradition: though i framed my reconstruction as a “monastic dreamworld” (Caner, Wandering, Begging Monks, 20), i should have discussed whose dreams i was reconstructing. 15. Hist. mon. 1.44–56, 21.6–9; Palladius, Hist. laus. 18.6–10; v. Onoph. 10–12; see Bernard flusin, “le serviteur caché ou le saint sans existence,” in Les Vies des saints à Byzance: Genre littéraire ou biographie historique? ed. Paolo odorico and Panagiotis a. agapitos, Dossiers byzantins 4 (Paris: Centre d’études byzantines, néo-helléniques et sud-est européennes, 2004), 59–71. 16. on gazan monasticism, see Jennifer hevelone-harper, Disciples of the Desert: Monks, Laity, and Spiritual Authority in Sixth-Century Gaza (Baltimore: Johns hopkins University Press, 2005); and Brouria Bitton-ashkelony and aryeh Kofsky, The Monastic School of Gaza, supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 78 (leiden: Brill, 2006); for support of anchorites with bread rations, Daniel Caner, “Towards a miraculous economy: Christian gifts and Charitable ‘Blessings’ in late antiquity,” Journal of Early Christian Studies 14 (2006): 347.

Wandering Monks Remembered

155

he heard matthew 19:21: “if you wish to be perfect, sell all your possessions, give to the poor . . . and come, follow me” (v. Alex. Acoem. 5). Joining a syrian cenobium known for its liturgical practices, he trained for four years until he noticed that the monastery did not observe everything set forth in the gospels. he therefore left to live on the eastern bank of the euphrates. over thirty years he devised his own liturgical regimen of unceasing prayer; the Life describes in detail the scriptural passages that inspired him to arrange 400 greek, roman, syrian, and egyptian monks into separate choirs that could perform psalms and doxologies in unceasing, “sleepless” shifts. having perfected this discipline alexander took it on the road, spending the last twenty years of his life traveling from mesopotamia to antioch and Constantinople. in roman fortress towns along the Persian frontier they “strengthened all in their faith” and “taught the rich to do good deeds” (v. Alex. Acoem. 33). When barred from entering Palmyra, whose leaders allegedly feared having to feed them all, they turned north to emesa and antioch. here they camped in an abandoned bathhouse while alexander preached to the poor, berated the rich, and harassed church and civic leaders on “many matters he felt they had neglected” (v. Alex. Acoem. 38–41). These exiled him to the city of Chalcis. escaping from there, alexander headed north, stopping at monasteries along the way. he finally settled with 300 monks in a martyr’s shrine in downtown Constantinople. here “his way of life continually rebuked those who debased the commandments” (v. Alex. Acoem. 44). alexander was formally charged with heresy and exiled once more, this time to a place called gomōn up the Bosphorus. he died soon after. There is no question that the Life of Alexander was written with apologetic intent. The author acknowledges in his preface that satan conspired with church and civic leaders to assault alexander throughout his career (v. Alex. Acoem. 2–3); he returns to the theme at the end of the vita, explaining how satan, having enlisted the whole world in a diabolical alliance, hurled his final shaft: “it was reported to the prefects that ‘the monk alexander is a heretic and wants to defile god’s church’ ” (v. Alex. Acoem. 48). Details about this and related episodes in alexander’s life are left decidedly vague. only from his contemporary, the monk nilus of ancyra, do we learn that alexander was identified as a “messalian” heretic, was thought to have taught other monks not to work, and was known for using “insults and rage” to compel people to provide his material support, specifically karpophoriai, “fruitbearings” or “thank-offerings.”17 What is remarkable is that the Life of Alexander should allude to such controversial aspects of this saint’s life at all. meticulous in describing the educational, chronological, and geographical circumstances of

17. nilus, De voluntaria paupertate ad Magnam 21 (Pg 79:997a) with Ep. 1.129 (137C); Caner, Wandering, Begging Monks, 137–49.

156

Daniel F. Caner

alexander’s career as well as the scriptural passages and methods of interpretation that inspired him, this hagiographer evidently desired to set the record straight on the “life and Conduct of our sainted alexander” (as the Life is entitled). Thanks to his hagiography it is possible to appreciate alexander on distinctly different terms than those recorded by nilus. These were apostolic terms. from the beginning to end the Life presents him as an apostolikos anēr, one who “eagerly strove to deliver the whole world to his master Christ” and “boldly taught the word of truth, gathering many people together and delivering them to Christ” (v. Alex. Acoem. 1, 4, 52; cf. 31, 33, 38, 44). alexander’s entire career is interpreted through this apostolic motif. The Life expicitly presents him as an avatar of the apostle Paul, even recasting one of his experiences as an episode described in acts 28:2, verbatim (v. Alex. Acoem. 35; cf. 3, 29, 31). at the same time it explains how the saint aspired to a “strict” (akribes), that is, a literal, interpretation of the gospels (v. Alex. Acoem. 7, 8, 14, 17, 28, 44). Besides matthew 19:21 (“if you wish to be perfect, go sell all of your possessions”), the precepts that reportedly moved him were matthew 6:33–34, “Care not for tomorrow,” and mark 9:22, “all things are possible for one who believes.” These inspired in him an uncompromising notion of evangelical poverty, which meant absolute destitution combined with faith that god would provide: this was the basis for his radical amerimnia and aktēmosynē, the “freedom from care” and “freedom from possessions” that he insisted his monks observe collectively as well as individually (v. Alex. Acoem. 7, 18, 33, 37, 39, 44).18 The hagiographer devotes as much narrative to explaining and exemplifying these scruples as he does to describing the liturgical innovations for which alexander ultimately became less controversially known. alexander’s commitment to apostolic poverty is illustrated at one point by his censure of a cenobium garden (v. Alex. Acoem. 42: he deemed it an impediment to “perfect” virtue; cf. 36), but is more often conveyed by episodes that depict him and his monks waiting to receive divinely provided food, delivered by angels who appear in the guise of soldiers, nomads, bakers, and so on, leading donkeys laden with bread to the monks’ desert encampments and urban refuges (v. Alex. Acoem. 19, 33, 35, 45). as the Life indicates, this walking man’s brand of monasticism presumed that benefactors would provide material support for those who provided spiritual services. similar assumptions are attested among monks in the fourth and fifth centuries from Persian mesopotamia to roman north africa. significantly, in each case about which we are informed, it is noted that the monks in question espoused literal interpretations of Jesus’s new Testament precepts.19 already 18. Caner, Wandering, Begging Monks, 137; Caner, “notions of “strict Discipline’ and apostolic Practice in early Definitions of orthodox monasticism,” in Orthodoxie, Christianisme, Histoire, ed. susanna elm, Éric rebillard, and antonella romano (rome: École de française de rome, 2000), 23–34. 19. Caner, Wandering, Begging Monks, 83–127.

Wandering Monks Remembered

157

described in the third-century Letters to Virgins and Acts of Thomas, this approach to monastic life received its boldest exposition in a voluminous syriac treatise called the Book of Steps. Probably written in the western Persian empire in the late fourth century, it carefully distinguishes between ordinary “righteous” Christians and ascetic “perfect” Christians. The latter were not clerics but lay zealots who, like the apostles, were expected to embrace absolute poverty and dedicate themselves to providing prayers and other spiritual services in return for material support. one striking historical feature of the treatise is its confidence that these arrangements would be viewed by readers as obvious and normal, given the prescriptions for perfectionism presented by Jesus in the gospels.20 Mutatis mutandis, francis of assisi and the medieval mendicants represent a revival of this gospel-based conceptualization of monasticism. But in the late fourth century the apostolic pretensions implicit in this approach did not sit well with many church officials, who quickly came to identify its emphasis on prayer to the neglect of work with “messalianism,” a heresy defined as belief that continuous prayer could purify as effectively as baptism. Whether or not alexander regarded himself as a messalian, his aggressive promotion of his ascetic scruples made others suspicious: Certain faithless men tried to put grace to the text. They stayed with the brothers day and night, wanting to see how the slaves of god were supplied with food. . . . since the blessed one knew through the spirit what they were thinking, he said to the brother who attended him, “go out and receive the things sent by our master.” . . . There came a man dressed in white vestment, knocking hard. When the brother opened the door and found a basket filled with fresh, warm loaves of bread, [he] did not see the one who had knocked, for an angel of god had produced the man with the bread and had gone away. . . . alexander took the warm bread and served it up . . . and they were astounded by the great liberality of the man, seeing that, in accordance with scripture, he showed no care for tomorrow. (v. Alex. Acoem. 45)

We must not dismiss such hagiographic depictions of angelic feeding as mere clichés. This episode illustrates a conviction that all the donations (or karpophoriai) that alexander received ultimately came from god, even if physically delivered by human donors. such an “overdetermined” depiction of human and divine agency addressed precisely that feature of alexander’s life that nilus and others considered most disreputable (viz., his demand that others support him—his aggressive begging), by revealing its divine basis and invisible dynamics. There is no reason to think that, apologetic intent aside, this narrative does not faithfully represent alexander’s own spiritual teaching and justification of mendicancy.21 20. Kristian s. heal and robert a. Kitchen, eds., Breaking the Mind: New Studies in the Syriac Book of Steps (Washington, DC: Catholic University of america Press, 2013). 21. Vincent Déroche, Études sur Léontios de Néapolis, studia Byzantina Upsaliensia 3 (Uppsala: Uppsala Universitet, 1995), 249–54.

158

Daniel F. Caner

Why and for whom was this apologetic “remembrance” produced? even if we set aside the author’s conventional claim that some of what he was describing he himself had witnessed (v. Alex. Acoem. 54), it is clear that he was writing after the akoimēte monastery had relocated to irenaion, a suburb about 13 km north of Constantinople, after it had gained importance, “not only in those regions . . . but everywhere in creation,” through a network of monasteries that extended to Persia (v. Alex. Acoem. 52). such clues indicate a fifth-century date (perhaps before ca. 489), with composition outside Constantinople, perhaps at alexander’s original foundation on the eastern bank of the euphrates.22 But more intriguing is the author’s expression of purpose. in his conclusion the author states his hope that

22. The Life twice refers to the monastery as that “of the sleepless ones” (v. Alex. Acoem. 51, 53), which corresponds to the title given for the irenaion monastery in v. Marc. Acoem. 7. hence stephanos efthymiadis, “greek hagiography in late antiquity (fourth–seventh Centuries),” in The Ashgate Research Companion in Byzantine Hagiography, ed. stephanos efthymiadis, vol. 1, Periods and Places (farnham: ashgate, 2011), 58 incorrectly asserts that it “must have been written before the akoimeti took up residence in irenaion.” But a date before ca. 489 is warranted. others have proposed that sections 9–23 on alexander’s conversion of rabbula were intended to clear the akoimētes of “nestorian” sympathies in the early sixth century: e.g., Pierre-louis gatier, “Un moine sur la frontière: alexandre le acémète en syrie,” in Frontières terrestres, frontières célestes dans l’antiquité, ed. aline rousselle (Paris: Presses Universitaires de Perpignan, 1995), 440–41. however, section 22 refers to the “school of the Persians” as if it still existed at edessa. Therefore those sections must have been written prior to its expulsion from edessa in 489. if these derived from a source that was extant at the time of composition of the Life as a whole (and not created and interpolated later—see below n. 33), then section 22 establishes a terminus ante quem for the entire Life. other clues support an early date. The author (whom de stoop believed wrote ca. 460) claims to have recorded “what [he] had observed” (54). one way of explaining his emphasis on the apostolic nature of alexander’s career—unusual in the hagiographic tradition—is to assume that he was personally familiar with it. De stoop and others assume that the Life was written in Constantinople, but internal clues suggest otherwise. The author repeatedly refers to Constantinople and its institutions as lying “in those regions” (ἐν τοῖς μέρεσιν ἐκείνοις, v. Alex. Acoem. 43 twice, 44, 53; ed. de stoop, 692–93, 701). he uses the same phrase to describe alexander’s view of syria before he arrives there and the location of a monastery visited en route to Constantinople (v. Alex. Acoem. 6, 42; ed. de stoop, 661, 691), and uses the phrase “in these regions” (ἐν τοῖς μέρεσιν τούτοις, v. Alex. Acoem. 42, ed. de stoop, 691) only when alexander relocates there and reflects on its distance from syria. i therefore propose that the Life was written in syria, perhaps at the monastery that alexander originally founded on the euphrates (v. Alex. Acoem. 26–30). my reasoning is as follows. Though written in greek, sections in the Life suggest that its author knew syriac: arthur Vööbus, “la vie d’alexandre en grec: Un témoin d’une biographie inconnue de rabbula écrite en syriaque,” Contributions of the Baltic University 61 (1948): 1–16. The inclusion of the rabbula sections and access to their source suggest that it was written near edessa, where rabbula was important. its reference to alexander’s leaving a “gentle, serene and holy man of god named Trophimus” (v. Alex. Acoem. 31) to supervise that euphrates monastery suggests institutional knowledge of its history; nowhere else does the Life name alexander’s disciples. These points suggest it was written at Trophimus’s monastery. its composition in greek rather than syriac may have been intended to address readers both there and in Constantinople, since greek was typically used to reach broad audiences in both places (see millar, “Theodoret of Cyrrhus,” 105–25).

Wandering Monks Remembered

159

“others more learned in these matters will tell them more clearly for the edification and profit of those who wish to pursue this way of life” (v. Alex. Acoem. 54).23 This statement indicates that he was not just writing for cultic purposes—to engage the powers of a deceased saint and attract patronal donors—although that is a purpose that modern historians most often ascribe to hagiographers.24 he attributes only two specific miracles to alexander (and minor miracles by any standard: a premonition that a disciple had committed a theft, an awareness that pots had boiled when no fire had been lit beneath; v. Alex. Acoem. 46–47). he mentions the efficacy of alexander’s relics mainly to provide proof of divine approval of alexander’s conduct while alive (“his saintly relics have worked miracles every day, so that god . . . might show even there that . . . all the blessed one’s acts were performed according to god’s will,” v. Alex. Acoem. 53). Thus the author’s purpose was both apologetic and didactic. he desired, it seems, to educate akoimēte recruits (“those who wish to pursue this way of life”) about the true origins of the sleepless ones and to assure them of their founder’s orthodoxy: “But we ourselves know that the highest portent of all is the correct way of living (ho orthos bios) that this perfect teacher attained” (v. Alex. Acoem. 54). Placed at the end of the miracle section, this remark reveals the author’s hagiographic priorities. in other words, this hagiography seems to have been an internal document, meant to be read by akoimēte monks for historical as well as ethical illumination. That this was the author’s intent is signaled from the start: Therefore since all those who write histories (historēsantes) have kept silent on account of the sheer feebleness of words for expounding [his life], and since this silence has borne no fruit for those who want to emulate [it], for their sake do i . . . readily bear the charge of recklessness for the profit of those who want to emulate

23. V. Alex. Acoem. 54 (ed. de stoop, 701): ἐλπίζομεν . . . καὶ ἑτέρους πνεύματι ἁγίῳ κινουμένους καὶ πλεῖον ἡμῶν ταῦτα ἐπισταμένους, τρανότερον διηγήσεσθαι, πρὸς οἰκοδομὴν καὶ ὠφέλειαν τῶν βουλομένων τὴν πολιτείαν ταύτην μετέρχεσθαι. 24. see hippolyte Delehaye, ed., L’ancienne hagiographie byzantine: Les sources, les premiers modèles, la formation des genres, studia hagiographica 73 (Brussels: société des Bollandistes, 1991), 3; and Cyril mango, “saints,” in The Byzantines, ed. guglielmo Cavallo (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997), 255–80. True, v. Alex. Acoem. 53–54 refer to relics and intercessions. Yet the author’s “remembrance” (μνημόσυνον ἐν εὐλογίας), v. Alex. Acoem. 4 (ed. de stoop, 660), emphasizes edification of audience rather than acquisition of intercession, employing exhortatory-didactic language in his introduction and conclusion. for the didactic role of hagiography among late antique monastic readers, see Peter Brown, “The saint as exemplar,” Representations 2 (1983): 1–25, Claudia rapp, “storytelling as spiritual Communication in early greek hagiography: The Use of Diegesis,” Journal of Early Christian Studies 6 (1998): 431–48; and rapp, “The origins of hagiography and the literature of early monasticism: Purpose and genre between Tradition and innovation,” in Unclassical Traditions, vol. 1, Alternatives to the Classical Past in Late Antiquity, ed. Christopher Kelly, richard flower, and michael stuart Williams, supplement to Cambridge Classical Journal 34 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 119–30.

160

Daniel F. Caner

[it], and take this opportunity to make a partial description of his life. (v. Alex. Acoem. 4)25

it is not unusual in early hagiography to find the word “history” used to describe a narrative of a saint’s life (where it might just mean a vivid account).26 But in this case the author declares his intent to provide an exposition (exēgēsis) of origins: “i will describe both where this holy man came from and the origin of his mode of athleticism” (v. Alex. Acoem. 1).27 such an explicitly historical agenda is unusual for a hagiographer. Considering the apologetic elements of the Life discussed above, i propose that its author meant not only to explain the origins of his saint but to set the historical record straight on the sleepless monks’ founder for later members of the institution. But his remark that “all” who previously had an opportunity to explain alexander had “kept silent” seems critically pointed. Whom was he criticizing? it is possible that he meant church historians like socrates, sozomen, and Theodoret who punctuated their fifth-century narratives of ecclesiastical conflicts with edifying descriptions of prominent monks. alternatively, considering that his frequent citations from scripture parallel the style of Theodoret’s Religious History, it may be that he was responding to Theodoret’s omission of alexander in that text, which apparently became widely available in syria soon after it was finished in the 440s.28 Yet it is also possible that the historēsantes in question were simply other akoimēte monks who had written about the institution. in fact, we have just such an account in the sixth-century hagiography produced about its third leader, marcellus (d. ca. 484).29 Written in Constantinople for an audience that was expected to be able to understand allusions to homeric heroes as well as to the gospels, the Life of Marcellus celebrates this abbot for substantially endowing the monastery, expanding its building facilities, enrolling numerous prestigious recruits, developing connections with church leaders and aristocrats at Constantinople, and filling

25. V. Alex. Acoem. 4 (ed. de stoop, 659): ἐπεὶ οὖν πάντες οἱ ἱστορήσαντες ἐσίγησαν διὰ τὴν ὑπερβάλλουσαν τοῦ λόγου ἀσθένειαν πρὸς τὴν ἐξήγησιν, καὶ ἄκαρπος ἡ σιωπὴ γέγονε τοῖς ζηλῶσαι βουλομένοις, τούτων χάριν ἡμεῖς . . . διὰ τὴν ὠφέλειαν τῶν ζηλῶσαι βουλομένων, ῥᾷον φέρομεν τῆς προπετείας τὸν λόγον, καὶ καιρὸν παρακολουθήσαντες, ἐκ μέρους διηγησόμεθα. 26. Both ancient hagiographers and historians emphasized provision of exempla for emulation: see Claudia rapp, “Byzantine hagiographers as antiquarians, seventh to Tenth Centuries,” in Bosphorus: Essays in Honour of Cyril Mango, ed. stephanos efthymiadas, Claudia rapp, and Dimitris Tsougarakis, Byzantinische forschungen 21 (amsterdam: hakkert, 1995), 42. 27. V. Alex. Acoem. 1 (ed. de stoop, 658): διηγήσομαι πόθεν καὶ ὁ ἅγιος . . . οὗτος κατάγεται καὶ πόθεν ἐστὶν ὁ τρόπος τῆς ἀθλήσεως. 28. Krueger, “Typological figuration,” 395, 400–405. 29. greek vita (Bhg 1027a), ed. gilbert Dagron, “le Vie ancienne de saint marcel l’acémète,” Analecta Bollandiana 86 (1968): 271–321.

Wandering Monks Remembered

161

the world with god’s kerygma “as if from a new Jerusalem” (v. Marc. Acoem. 7–8, 11–14, 37). it mentions alexander, but only as a “noble athlete of god” (v. Marc. Acoem. 4–5)—a remarkably vague and anodyne description.30 indeed, the express purpose of the Life of Marcellus was cultic, encomiastic, and institutional, exhorting akoimēte monks to pray with thanks to god that marcellus’s acts and intercessions had bestowed on them so many blessings.31 The sixth century was an age of historical revisionism in Constantinople’s monasteries, especially when it came to the founders of prestigious institutions.32 Writing in the first half of the sixth century (and excluding anything controversial about marcellus), the author of the Life of Marcellus states that his work was partly based on what earlier monks had written.33 Perhaps this included writings of earlier historēsantes whose silence the author of the Life of Alexander hoped to amend. Be that as it may, his hopes went unfulfilled. The Life of Marcellus shows that the Life of Alexander, despite being an earlier text relevant to the institution, was largely ignored. We would not know its version of alexander at all were it not for the survival of a single tenth- or eleventh-century manuscript.34 Besides its remembrance 30. V. Marc. Acoem. 4 (ed. Dagron, 290): γενναῖον . . . τοῦ θεοῦ ἀθλητήν. 31. V. Marc. Acoem. 36 (ed. Dagron, 320): Δεῦτε . . . εὐχαριστήσωμεν καὶ διὰ Μαρκέλλου τῷ σωτῆρι . . . δέδωκεν ἡμῖν διὰ Μαρκέλλου προφητικήν τε ἅμα καὶ ἀποστολικὴν εὐλογίαν . . . 37 (321) Ὑμνήσωμεν δή, θεοπηιλέστατοι ἀδελφοί, ἐν τῇ ἁγίου μνήμῃ τὸν καὶ Μαρκέλλου θεόν, ἑορτάσωμεν ἑορτην . . . οὐ πολυτέλειαν τοῖς βρώμασιν προστιθεντες, ἀλλὰ συντονίᾳ τὴν εὐχὴν κατακοσμοῦντες. Unlike the Life of Alexander, much of the Life of Marcellus describes healing miracles. 32. gilbert Dagron, “les moines et la ville: le monachisme à Constantinople,” Travaux et Mémoires 4 (1970): 229–76. 33. V. Marc. Acoem. 37 (ed. Dagron, 321): οἱ μετ’ αὐτὸν αὐτοῦ ζηλωταὶ καὶ ἐν λόγοις ἐδίδαξαν καὶ ἐν γράμμασιν κατέλειψαν ἡμῖν. The vita (which Dagron dates ca. 550; efthymiadis, “greek hagiography,” 58, soon after 518) mentions neither marcellus’s support of Chalcedon nor his relations with Theodoret, whom Justinian had anathematized in 543 or 544. as Dagron points out, the akoimētes were known for their scribal work and had a good library: we know they possessed 2,000 letters by the fifthcentury priest-monk isidore of Pelusium. The rabbula sections of the Life of Alexander (above, n. 22) show that other accounts of alexander’s life existed, apparently prior to the Life of Alexander. These sections include motifs prominent elsewhere in the Life, and so may have been reworked by our author. on their historicity, see glen W. Bowersock, “The syriac life of rabbula and syrian hellenism,” in Greek Biography and Panegyrics in Late Antiquity, ed. Tomas hägg and Philip rousseau, Transformation of the Classical heritage 31 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000), 255–71. 34. By contrast, the Life of Marcellus was included among the saints’ lives important enough to be rewritten by symeon the metaphrast: see Dagron, “le Vie ancienne de saint marcel l’acémète,” 280–84. familiarity with the Life of Alexander is suggested by its identification of alexander as a γενναῖος ἀθλητής (above, n. 30): eleven out of thirteen total attestations in greek hagiography come from alexander’s Life (v. Alex. Acoem. 2, 4 [2x], 11, 13, 19, 27, 46, 48, 52). The Life of Alexander was certainly read somewhere near Constantinople, because a truncated version reached compilers of a greco-slavic menalogion: see Joanne martinov, Annus ecclesiasticus Graeco-Slavicus (Brussels: Typis henrici goemaere, 1863), 78–79. Certain features of the Life of Marcellus (e.g., references to his ascetic akribeia and inspiration by matthew 6:33) may reflect knowledge of alexander’s tradition, but it is impossible to ascertain.

162

Daniel F. Caner

of alexander’s brush with heresy, its emphasis on his insistence on apostolic poverty must have discomforted sixth-century akoimēte monks and seemed incongruous with their institution. more congruent with monastic trends from the fifth century onward is the commemoration of Barsauma in the Life of Barsauma, to which we now turn. Ba r s aUm a a n D T h e P e n i T e n T ia l Pa r a D ig m

Barsauma, even more than alexander the sleepless, deserves description as a syrian “walking man.” according to the Life of Barsauma, his destinations included not only Jerusalem, melitene, Claudias, and Constantinople but also cities and villages vaguely located to the north, south, and east of his monastery. like alexander, he reportedly took all his monks on these travels and spent much time harassing church and civic authorities along the way. like alexander, he was known for espousing freedom from possessions and freedom from care, and similarly censured a solitary for cultivating a vineyard, and preventing his own monks from doing the same (§§ 52–53). and like alexander, Barsauma was not remembered for supporting himself through manual labors, but for living entirely off the fruits of the earth and the kindness of strangers. There the parallels end. The first half of the Life of Barsauma is organized as a collection of heroic feats. only at the end of the second half of the Life are Barsauma’s prior travels cast as part of an overarching quest to die for the faith (“it was for this that i traveled in distant countries, but nowhere did i meet with this opportunity,” § 145.3; cf. §§ 93.8, 110.8). The Life’s scriptural citations and allusions seem haphazard. To be sure, it introduces Barsauma with a prophecy reminiscent of that of John the Baptist (§ 2.2), depicts his stoning in terms of stephen the protomartyr (§ 145.12), and elsewhere invokes old Testament motifs and exemplars (aaron’s staff, the Three Boys of Babylon, elisha, samuel, moses, Joseph, Josiah, elijah: §§ 17.5, 18.5, 35.1, 93.8, 110.9 106.5, 155.5). But the absence of a repeated set of scriptural citations makes the Life of Barsauma quite different from the Life of Alexander. instead, Barsauma’s quest for self-mortification (more accurately, ascetic martyrdom) is framed by vivid descriptions of his excruciating uls. anē, a word variously translated as “agonies,” “sufferings,” “afflictions,” or “hardships.”35

35. it is the hagiographical approach of the Life of Alexander, not of the Life of Barsauma, that is unusual: cf. the discussion of typology in Krueger, “Typological figuration,” 393–419 and method of the syriac Life of Simeon Stylites, discussed below. for the notion of asceticism as martyrdom, Clare stancliffe, “red, White, and Blue martyrdom,” in Ireland in Early Medieval Europe: Studies in Memory of Kathleen Hughes, ed. Dorothy Whitelock, rosamund mcKitterick, and David n. Dumville (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), 21–46.

Wandering Monks Remembered

163

Barsauma’s endurance of self-imposed afflictions unifies the Life. it is first used to explain Barsauma’s early attempt to kill himself during his initial foray to his mountain cave (§ 6.1). his survival prompted his pursuit of other “great hardships” (§ 7.1): these include his refusal to ever sit or lie down (presented as a form of selfcrucifixion, § 8.1), his lifelong abstinence from bread, wine, water, and oil (an “extreme hardship,” § 10.1–3), his self-immolation in the iron vest that he rotated toward the sun (“how much hardship he was able manfully to bear!” § 17.2), and his torturous regimen of prayer, performed with “groaning deeply and weeping astonishing tears” (“every day . . . he would subject himself to this hardship,” § 20.2). These are presented from beginning to end as exertions for Christ (‘umlē, §§ 3.7, 157.3, 164.2) and at one point are explained as the ascetic equivalent of the “offering” that the martyrs had given through corporeal sufferings to reconcile with god (§ 83.6). significantly, no emphasis on such sufferings is found in the Life of Alexander, whose only two references to alexander’s pursuit of physical affliction (thlipsis, v. Alex. Acoem. 31–32, 36) seem intended to recall deprivations mentioned by the apostle Paul (thlibomenos, romans 8:35, quoted in v. Alex. Acoem. 3). nonetheless the imagery set forth in the Life of Barsauma would have been immediately recognizable to eastern Christian audiences from the late fifth century onward. Whereas alexander was represented as an “apostolic man,” Barsauma is introduced as the consummate abila, a “mourner” par excellence: he is called the “head of the mourners,” “master of the mourners,” and mourner whose “perfection . . . surpassed all others” (§§ 1 (title), 143.2, 1.2). Who were syrian mourners? scholars have often explained them as equivalents of egyptian or Palestinian anchorites. But that is imprecise. Unlike the greek word anachōritēs (which is not scriptural and simply means “one who withdraws”), the syriac designation derives from the second Beatitude, “Blessed are the mourners (t. ubyhon l-abilē), for they shall be comforted” (matthew 5:4; cf. luke 6:20–21). as that implies, this form of monasticism (abilutā) was penitential in focus. its practitioners were dedicated to securing pardon for sins on Judgment Day by atoning in advance.36 Their extravagant measures are well known. some wore heavy chains, long hair, and sackcloth to reflect and enhance their penitential commitment (cf. Philippians 4:5, “let your lowliness be known to all people”); others devised contraptions to exert stress on their bodies, generating tears and visions; all strengthened their supplications with copious

36. Tanios Bou-mansour, “les écrits ascétiques ou ‘monastiques’ d’isaac dit d’antioche,” in Christianisme oriental: Kerygme et histoire; Mélanges offerts au père Michel Hayek, ed. Charles Chartouni (Paris: geuthner, 2007), 47–80; andrew Palmer, Monk and Mason on the Tigris Frontier: The Early History of T. ur “Abdin (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), 85–86; and henze, The Madness of King Nebuchadnezzar.

164

Daniel F. Caner

lamentations and physical hardships. often these went beyond fasting to include complete avoidance of human contact and comforts. Technically known as naziruta, this practice derived from old Testament prescriptions for nazirites, who achieved atonement through a vow to separate from society, abstain from wine, avoid corpses, and let their hair grow long for a temporary period (numbers 6:2–21).37 among Christian mourners such abstinences became permanent, extended to all human comforts, and were sometimes manifested by living in caves and foraging for vegetation in a manner that greek writers called “grazing.” The fifth-century church historian sozomen considered this practice to be distinctive of the earliest mesopotamian monks who dwelled on the mountainous plateaus north of harran: They were called grazers (boskoi) because they had no homes, ate neither bread nor meat and drank no wine, but dwelt constantly in the mountains, continually praising god with prayers and hymns according to the law of the Church, and at the accustomed meal hours they would each take a sickle and wander in the mountains as if they were grazing.

“This,” insists sozomen, “was their kind of philosophy.”38 Barsauma is portrayed by the Life of Barsauma as just such a grazer: he set out again to go to a certain desolate mountain on his own. he was there throughout the winter under snow and ice. as for food, he received none there from any man, but he would gather the wild herbs from places that were denuded of snow and get nourishment from these. (§ 5.1; cf. §§ 10.1–4, 19.1)

This way of life is illustrated by isaac of antioch’s description of monks whose hair became matted like eagle’s beaks and whose fingernails grew the length of talons in his mid-fifth-century Letters to the Mountaineers.39 What needs to be recognized is 37. stuart Chepey, Nazarites in Late Second Century Judaism: A Survey of Ancient Jewish Writings, the New Testament, Archaeological Evidence, and Other Writings from Late Antiquity, ancient Judaism and early Christianity 60 (leiden: Brill, 2005); arthur Vööbus, A History of Asceticsim in the Syrian Orient, vol. 1, The Origin of Asceticism: Early Monasticism in Persia, CsCo 184, subsidia 14 (louvain: secrétariat du CorpussCo, 1958), 254 n. 206; and Bou-mansour, “les écrits ascétiques,” 74. severus of antioch’s depiction of simeon stylites, John of ephesus’s Lives of the Eastern Saints 3 (“John the Perfect nazirite”) and 6 (“the Perfect nazarite, Paul the mourner,” and The Canons Ascribed to Mârûtâ of Maipherqat and related sources, ed. arthur Vööbus, CsCo 439, 440, scriptores syri 191, 192 (louvain: Peeters, 1982, can. 54 and 114 describe naziruta as a punishment for cenobites and genuflections as an expression of sorrow. 38. soz. Hist. eccl. 6.33.2. Vööbus, “The origin of asceticism,” 150–57 considered the practice an example of the “exotic physiognomy of the primitive syrian monasticism.” in Vööbus, History of Asceticism in the Syrian Orient 2:24, he opines that sozomen used syriac sources. Yet the origin of the greek term boskos is not clear. The closest approximation in syriac is “mountaineer” (t.urayā): see Boumansour, “les écrits ascétiques,” 62. 39. edward g. matthews, “on solitaries: ephrem or isaac?,” Le Muséon 103 (1990): 91–110; Boumansour, “les écrits ascétiques,” 47–80.

Wandering Monks Remembered

165

that such grazing was understood as a form of penance. matthias henze has established that it was inspired by nebuchadnezzar’s penance in the book of Daniel.40 here the downcast king is instructed to redeem himself by living among “the beasts of the field.” according to the book of Daniel, “he was driven away from men and ate grass like cattle, and his body was drenched with the dew of heaven, until his hair grew long like eagles’ [feathers] and his nails like [the claws of] birds” (Daniel 4:28–30). isaac’s Letters explicitly urge monks to imitate nebuchadnezzar’s example by fleeing cities to lead a life of mourning in the mountains.41 This mode of asceticism, however, is mainly attested in sixth- and seventh-century Palestine, where monastic “grazers” lived in caves and fed on asphodel roots growing by the Dead sea, red sea, and river Jordan. These were explicitly distinguished from “anchorites,” who presumably lived in cells and obtained their supplies by other means.42 grazers captivated the late antique imagination: evagrius scholasticus describes them scurrying off like animals at the sight of other men, “no longer human in their state of mind.”43 Yet, in Palestine as in syria, such transformations were considered to be the result of thorough repentance,44 and the impulse behind such behavior was understood to be penitential. This rationale (and resultant self-assurance) is clear in an anecdote about a anchorite who suddenly took to desert wandering:

40. matthias henze, The Madness of King Nebuchadnezzar: The Ancient Near Eastern Origins and Early History of Interpretation of Daniel 4, supplement to the Journal for the study of Judaism 61 (leiden, Boston, and Cologne: Brill, 1999), 143–79. 41. henze, The Madness of King Nebuchadnezzar, 155–201; Bou-mansour, “les écrits ascétiques,” 66–67. 42. John moschus, Prat. 19, 21, 92, 129, 154, 159, 167 (cf. 84, 91, 115 on elders living only on grass and nuts); leont. neap. v. Sym. Sal. 14; Apophth. Patr., coll. sys. 15.70. Cyril scyth. v. Sab. 16, differentiates between boskoi and anachōrites who lived in cells or lavrae: Joseph Patrich, Sabas, Leader of Palestinian Monasticism: A Comparative Study in Eastern Monasticism, Fourth to Seventh Centuries (Washington, DC: Dumbarton oaks, 1995), 293; cf. John Wortley, “ ‘grazers’ (Boskoi) in the Judean Desert,” in The Sabaite Heritage in the Orthodox Church from the Fifth Century to the Present, ed. Joseph Patrich (louvain: Peeters, 2001), 37–48. for health benefits see Yizhar hirschfeld, “edible Wild Plants: The secret Diet of monks in the Judaean Desert,” Israel Land and Nature 16 (1990): 25–8. 43. evag. Hist. eccl. 1.21. for their relevance to cenobites, see flusin, “le serviteur caché,” 59–71; cf. the apophthegm contrasting the freedom of solitary grazing with the labor expected in a cenobium: greek Anon. coll. 62. for grazing as extreme asceticism, see John moschus, Prat. 92 (Pg 87[3]:2949): μετὰ τοσούτους κόπους καὶ τοσαυτὴν ἄσκησιν (cf. 115); leont. neap. v. Sym. Sal. (ed. festugière, 76): ἀσκοῦντες ἐν πάσῃ ἀσκήσει καὶ κακοπαθείᾳ. 44. The greek word metanoia means at once “repentence,” “penance,” “change of mind,” and “transformation.” The Palestinian custom may derive from John the Baptist’s example and proclamation of metanoia in matthew 3:1–4. his consumption of melagrion (the asphodel root eaten by grazers) was interpreted as “wild honey” (meli agron) by syriac (and later english) exegetes, who posited that he had eaten vegetables instead of locusts: see sebastian Brock, “The Baptist’s Diet in syriac sources,” Oriens Christianus 54 (1970): 113–24.

166

Daniel F. Caner

Two brothers lived together in the desert. one of them suddenly remembered god’s judgment and ran off to the desert to wander at length. The other went out after him and took many difficulties to find him. he said, “Why do you run off this way? Did you alone commit the sins of the world?” The brother replied, “Do you think that i don’t know that my sins have been absolved? i know god has pardoned my sins, but i take this trouble so that on Judgment Day i might behold those being judged.”45

This fascination is partly explained by lenten practices of certain cenobitic monasteries. Cyril of scythopolis reports that the fifth-century abbots euthymius and sabas selected certain monks from their communities and took them to forage on roots and grass in the Judean desert each year for forty days between epiphany and easter.46 a similar lenten practice is attributed to another unnamed Palestinian cenobitic monastery in the seventh-century Life of Mary of Egypt.47 apart from these texts, the only other attestation of such periodic communal penance comes from the Life of Barsauma. This states that Barsauma had a custom of leading all his disciples to a northern mountain 40 km away each year to feed on roots and grass between easter and Pentecost: “They suffered such extreme hardship (uls. an) that they would faint from cold and hunger and fall to the ground” (§ 13.2). Possible connections between these syrian and Palestinian penitential customs deserve exploration.48 here it is important to note that the inclusion of such details in the Life of Barsauma not only turned Barsauma into a exemplar of syrian penitential monasticism but also established a framework for understanding his powers as a saint. This framework is established from the start. By introducing Barsauma’s adoption of penitential hardships between his first journey to Jerusalem and first attempt to kill himself (§§ 4–6), the Life establishes a connection between such hardships and those that would feature so prominently in the later narrative; indeed, Barsauma’s conflict with the imperial church is itself presented as an uls. an in which he is assured that god will reward him for all his prior ascetic uls. anē (§§ 110.4–7, 113.2). Thereafter, the Life grounds Barsauma’s spiritual powers in his voluntary endurance of self-imposed afflictions:

45. Apophth. patr., coll. anon. 5 (ed. nau, 50); cf. coll. alph. Bessarion 12 (Pg 65:144); milesius 2; and John moschus, Prat. 167. 46. Cyr. scyth. v. Euth. 16, 25, 39; v. Sab. 11, 22. 47. Ps.-sophr. v. Mar. Aeg. 6–8; cf. flusin, “le serviteur cache,” 64–71. Metanoia is central to the depiction of mary in this text. 48. soz. Hist. eccl. 6.34 notes that winter kept monks in villages and cities in northern climes. This sufficiently explains why Barsauma’s practice was scheduled after and not before easter (cf. § 6.1).

Wandering Monks Remembered

167

o miraculous “vessel” . . . that it did not fall to pieces, turned to dust by all this hardship? . . . Barsauma’s body [was] “baked” in living fire and in the holy spirit. (§ 25.3) our lord Jesus Christ, what sin has he committed against You? . . . Why should he, of all people, get such a beating in Your presence? (§ 74.3)

such descriptions of Barsauma’s receipt of divine sympathy are interspersed among accounts of Barsauma’s miracles and confrontations with Jews, pagans, and samaritans in the first half of the Life. Unlike the Life of Alexander, which presents its saint as pursuing an uninterrupted trajectory after his departure from the euphrates to his persecution in Constantinople (pursuing a narrative arc reminiscent of that of Paul in acts), the Life of Barsauma depicts its saint as constantly returning to ascetic afflictions at his monastery after forays to the world below. it thereby consistently associates Barsauma’s spiritual powers with his penitential base. moreover, the divine sympathy Barsauma garnered through his voluntary endurance of physical sufferings is presented as essential to his transmission of blessings (§§ 74–75). his first miracle is connected to his endurance of ascetic uls. anē: “When Barsauma first bound himself to this hardship [viz., his refusal to ever sit or lie down], god gave him the following sign,” whereby Barsauma extended the shelf life of a piece of bread (§ 9.1). Unlike the rest of the earth that withered under the heat of the sun, Barsauma himself “grew greener from day to day and blossomed and flourished in the holy spirit” (§ 17.3). Thereafter his prayers made sour grapes sweet, barren fields fertile, and diseased bodies sound (§§ 18, 34–35, 49.1–4, 51.1, 54.2–5, 64–65).49 Coupled with his abstinence from “everything that is sown with the aid of a plow” (§ 10.1), this power to revive and bless nature made Barsauma an ascetic conduit of god’s material gifts—for example, “all the ‘grace’ which god sent to him and [Barsauma would] distribute it to the poor and to the brethren, wherever they were”; “if any ‘blessing’ was sent to him, only his disciples ate of it; he did not” (§§ 15.1, 19.1). implicit is that Barsauma, like alexander, enjoyed absolute freedom from possessions and care, but that he, unlike alexander, had no need of support apart from god’s grace (§§ 6.2, 9.1). nevertheless, since benefactors wanted to give gifts, the Life spells out rules by which he regulated their receipt. as it informs us, in that country they brought him many gifts, but he refused to accept anything but food and drink for the brethren. in his own monastery and the district where it lay Barsauma’s rule was to accept everything that was offered to him. But when he left his monastery and went on a journey, he accepted food and drink, but nothing else, neither gold, nor silver, nor bronze, nor clothes. (§ 81.1–2)

49. Cf. sebastian P. Brock, “humanity and the natural World in syrian Tradition,” Christian Orient 14 (1993): 145–53.

168

Daniel F. Caner

The Life insists that Barsauma and his followers never took fruits or accepted valuables while traveling (§ 81.3–4; cf. §§ 4.1, 42–43). indeed his scrupulous rejection of all “gifts of honor” at the court of Theodosius ii causes Barsauma to be elevated there to the “status of one of the apostles.” The Life says that he reluctantly accepted an altarpiece as a “small blessing” or “firstfruits” for his monastery (§ 104.2–3; cf. § 83.25–30), but later implies that he refused to accept even that (§ 124.3–5).50 no doubt these representations were meant to counter accusations of undue wealth to which the Life elsewhere alludes (“This criminal . . . claims not to accept gold from anyone, while in fact the silver and gold taken by the judges in bribes and seized from the poor fills many storehouses, and all of these belong to him,” § 111.2–3), let alone charges of scrounging for karpophoriai like those leveled against alexander. such charges became routine in this era of increasing church and monastic wealth, and were often justified: at some point in the fifth century an emperor issued a law forbidding rural priests from forcing people to give them karpophoriai, first fruits (aparches) and offerings (prosphorai) “as if a tax.”51 But the insertion of this section into the Life explaining Barsauma’s rules on gifts is striking. aside from reiterating his emphasis on self-denial, it had the benefit of sanctioning his monks’ acceptance of anything offered to them when not on the road. That situation became permanent as soon as the saint died. at that point, according to his hagiographer, “Barsauma’s spirit went up, and his body remained with us as a blessing” (§ 158.5). The Life of Barsauma ends by recording how his body was used to cure monastic visitors after the saint’s death (§§ 162–163). Barsauma thus bequeathed to the monastery rules sanctioning not only its institutional receipt of offerings but also its greatest institutional asset: his sanctified, physical relics. in other words, the Life of Barsauma was written to support a cult. This partly explains its focus on the saint’s physical sufferings, the supernatural endurance of his body, and his transformative spiritual powers. it also helps explain why (unlike the Life of Alexander but like the Life of Marcellus) it does not propose that anyone emulate the saint. it asks for nothing but attention and credence from those who hear it. as its author, samuel, states in its first colophon, Whoever reads and believes, whoever hears and affirms, and whoever praises Christ for what he hears shall have a share in the exertions of Barsauma and a part, together with all those who are chosen, in the covenant of the righteous! (§ 164.2)

50. on distinctions between blessings and worldly gifts, see Caner, “Towards a miraculous economy,” 329–77; and ariel lópez, Shenoute of Atripe and the Uses of Poverty: Rural Patronage, Religious Conflict, and Monasticism in Late Antique Egypt, Transformation of the Classical heritage 50 (Berkeley and los angeles: University of California Press, 2013), 46–71. 51. Cod. Iust. 1.3.38.2; see, evelyne Patlagean, Pauvreté économique et pauvreté sociale à Byzance, 4e-7e siècles (Paris: mouton, 1977), 273–74.

Wandering Monks Remembered

169

This is the only allusion to an audience found in the entire Life. Whereas the Lives of alexander and marcellus addressed members of a specific monastic institution, the Life of Barsauma extends its invitation to a general audience of Christian readers and listeners at large. Barsauma’s exertions might never be emulated, but would nevertheless reward all Christians who made an effort to believe in them. hag io g r a P h Y i n T h e L I V E S o f a l e X a n D e r a n D Ba r s aUm a

reading the Life of Alexander and Life of Barsauma together—and contrasting both to Theodoret’s Religious History—not only illustrates the sheer diversity of Christian monasticism that flourished in syria and mesopotamia during the fifth century. it also demonstrates the diversity that characterized early hagiography and the purposes for writing it. This new genre of biographical remembrances was still in its infancy, open to experimentation.52 hagiographers of the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries could draw on a spectrum of models for depicting ascetic saints. some, like those who produced the Life of Alexander and Life of Marcellus, sought to frame their subjects in an established literary tradition. others went in new directions. samuel refers to the Life of Barsauma as a “remembrance of feats” (‘uhdānā d-su’ranē, § 164.1). he makes plain in his preface that Barsauma’s feats were supposed to be compared with those of other unnamed “athletes” of his generation (pr. 2). Was there any local precedent for this hagiographic project? an intriguing possibility is the syriac account of Barsauma’s close contemporary, simeon stylites (d. 459). This syrian “athlete” raised penitential mourning to new heights by performing prayers on pillars of increasing size, culminating with one that stood forty cubits over Telneshe, a village seven days southwest of samosata. The composition of the syriac Life of Simeon is securely dated to 473. research has demonstrated that it was part of a broader effort to attract pilgrimage posthumously to his pillar in the 470s.53 Despite differences between the behavior of 52. on hagiography—a modern term—and its precedents, see Claudia rapp, “The origins of hagiography,” 119–30; Derek Krueger, “early Byzantine historiography and hagiography as Different modes of Christian Practice,” in Writing “True Stories”: Historians and Hagiographers in the Late Antique and Mediaeval Near East, ed. arietta Papaconstantinou, Cultural encounters in late antiquity and the middle ages 9 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2010), 13–20; nina lubomierski, “The Vita Sinuthii (The life of shenoute): Panegyric or Biography,” Studia Patristica 39 (2006): 417–21; Vincent Déroche, “la forme de l’informe: la vie de Théodore de sykéôn et la vie de syméon stylite le jeune,” in Les Vies des saints à Byzance: Genre littéraire ou biographie historique? ed. Paolo odorico and Panagiotis agapitos, Dossiers byzantins 4 (Paris: Centre d’études byzantines, néo-helléniques et sud-est européennes, 2004), 367–85; and marc Van Uytfanghe, “l’hagiographie: Un ‘genre’ chrétien ou antique tardif?,” Analecta Bollandiana 111 (1993): 135–88. 53. Dina Boero, “The Context of Production of the Vatican manuscript of the Syriac Life of Symeon the Stylite,” Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies 18.2 (2015): 319–59.

170

Daniel F. Caner

simeon and Barsauma (e.g., the immobility of one, the mobility of the other), the Life of Simeon, “a majestic, at times eloquent work of hagiography,”54 includes several features that are also prominent in the Life of Barsauma: its enumeration of simeon’s “deeds and signs” (v. Sym. §§ 7, 29, 37, 107); its showcasing of various constituencies in the roman empire and abroad (v. Sym. §§ 49, 56–82, 104–107); its denunciation of imperial protection of synagogues (v. Sym. §§ 121–123); and above all, its focus on endurance of hardships (v. Sym. § 108: “no one among ancients or more recent people could be found in flesh that could endure, sustain, and withstand the afflictions which the saint’s body endured and withstood”).55 simeon’s sufferings are similarly connected to his power to revive an exhausted world (v. Sym. § 75). he is likewise presented as a conduit of blessings and gifts to the poor (v. Sym. §§ 58–59).56 By the early sixth century this innovative hagiography had become known to Jacob of serugh (fl. ca. 502–519), some 80 km south of Barsauma’s monastery.57 Whether the priest samuel knew or directly used it when writing his Life of Barsauma must be determined by future research. But it is clear that he, like simeon’s hagiographers, was invested in helping Barsauma gain a “name in the world” (§§ 3.11, 11.3, 12.2–3; cf. v. Sym. §§ 3, 26, 34, 78, 104, 106, 114). By crafting the Life of Barsauma to serve the external needs of a public monastic cult rather than the internal needs of a specific institution, he succeeded in ensuring that this particular walking man would long be remembered.

54. harvey, “The sense of a stylite,” 381. 55. The Lives of Simeon Stylites, tr. robert Doran (Kalamazoo, mi: Cistercian Publications, 1992), 176. 56. harvey, “The sense of a stylite,” 381–88; and harvey, “The holy and the Poor: models from early syriac Christianity,” in Through the Eye of a Needle: Judeo-Christian Roots of Social Welfare, ed. emily hanawalt (Kirksville, mo: Thomas Jefferson University Press, 1994), 43–66. 57. susan a. harvey, “Jacob of serug’s homily on symeon the stylite,” in Ascetic Behavior in GrecoRoman Antiquity: A Sourcebook, ed. Vincent Wimbush (minneapolis: fortress Press, 1990), 15–25.

Conclusion Barsauma between Hagiography and History Johannes hahn

When françois nau published his selection of excerpts from the Life of Barsauma about a century ago, he immediately raised the question of the basic historicity of the dramatic events narrated in the hagiographic text. This historiographic focus is not self-evident when one deals with a late antique saint’s vita. it was a long-known and, in the conciliar acts of ephesus ii and Chalcedon (449 and 451), well-documented fact that this Barsauma was indeed a historical figure: that he acted as a powerful monastic leader and, in a very particular way, represented a fanatic asceticism that was very prominently involved in fifth-century ecclesiastical politics and late roman history in the east. This important documentary evidence immediately earmarked the Life of Barsauma as a potentially promising primary source for the great religious conflicts of this period. and, with its plethora of encounters and episodes connected to Barsauma’s travels in the area, the Life seemed to provide a different look into communal relations, religious and everyday life, and the increasingly precarious coexistence of ethnic and religious groups in a fifth-century Palestine under the sway of state-sponsored Christianization. suspicions were voiced early, however, that this extensive Life, one of the longest hagiographic texts from antiquity, may not be a historically reliable account at all, despite its narrative aspirations, but instead, quite to the contrary, little more than a fictional biography of negligible historical value. still, since their publication nau’s excerpts have predominantly been used for historical purposes: they have been quarried, with more or less restraint, for their accounts of religious conflict and religious violence, of Christian anti-Jewish zeal, and of the contest for religious space in the holy land. 171

172

Johannes Hahn

now that we have the full text of the Life of Barsauma in english translation in hand for the first time, we might expect to be able to recover or at least sketch the historical Barsauma, since before publication of the full Life, he has otherwise been only a shadowy and opaque figure in the few conciliar records that mention him. Yet, the close and critical reading of this hagiographic text, as carried out by the authors of the studies in this volume, should strongly warn us not to do so without thorough methodological reflection and considerable restraint. What we can primarily gain from the Life is an artfully crafted image or rather remembrance of Barsauma the saint, not a representation of a historical person. The Life’s Barsauma is, first and foremost, a literary, hagiographic figure and construct. its author—or authors, if we assume that the Life’s second part (§§ 104–169) was written by a different person—has a clear agenda: to turn his subject into a saint—that is, to turn a highly controversial ascetic and formidable protagonist of contemporary religious conflict into an exemplary monk and divinely inspired agent of orthodoxy. Barsauma’s election and formation as an ascetic, his incessant devotional pursuits, his feats of extreme asceticism, his mystical visions, and so on are thus not just the elements of a typical vita of a syrian saint, but serve, at the same time, as irrefutable arguments for and proof of his orthodoxy and divine authority, as well as legitimation for his violent actions. and so evaluation and contextualization of these important and notable aspects must be the first steps in any analysis of the Life. The Life abounds in miracles: healing, fertility, and punitive miracles, exorcisms, curses, and other extraordinary achievements occupy the foreground, and structure the hagiographic account in a perpetual sequence of “signs.” The narrative strategies employed to display the supernatural capacities, unmatched piety, and extraordinary exploits of the hero of this Life are multifarious: the author ascribes a regimen of unequaled, innovative ascetic hardships to Barsauma, sends him on pilgrimage while still a child, associates him with the ultimate saint of the age, simeon stylites, compares him to biblical models, lets him go on pilgrimage to the holy land no less than four times, and so on. These narrative techniques underline the consistently literary character of this hagiographic text—they artfully and purposefully shape, in the first part of the Life, the portrait of an accomplished monk and most powerful saint before Barsauma steps onto the public stage of religious conflict and ecclesiastical politics in Palestine to become a champion of Christianity, fighting infidels within and outside the church. The early appearance of Palestine and of the young Barsauma does not simply follow a biographical pattern. it carries particular significance. immediately after being called to an ascetic life (and appropriate miracles) and an elementary introduction into a recluse’s life by a distinguished mourner, the child Barsauma decides to make a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, only to suffer violence from pagans, Jews, and samaritans. Barsauma’s journey and stay in Jerusalem, clearly an invented

Conclusion: Barsauma between Hagiography and History

173

hagiographic twist, since the hagiographer has nothing else to relate about this voyage, is fundamental to the Life in two ways. after his return home, Barsauma immediately sets up his life as an independent ascetic and begins practicing extreme hardship as a standing mourner. no less programmatic to Barsauma’s view of the outside world and his further career as an itinerant monk is Palestine itself. Violence against nonbelievers, Jews, pagans, and nonorthodox alike becomes the hallmark of his public activities whenever he leaves his spiritual and penitential home base to battle evil and its agents in the outside world. in Palestine, then, Barsauma enters the public stage, and, according to his hagiographer, with his third voyage to the holy land at the latest (which coincides with eudocia’s first pilgrimage in 438), eventually enters the stage of roman imperial history when he meets the empress eudocia in Jerusalem for the first time (§ 83). But it is some years later, on his fourth visit to Palestine, that he forcefully intervenes in the public realm. in a fierce struggle for control over Jerusalem and the holy land against the Jews the saint violently frustrates the supposedly proJewish policy of the empress eudocia. he thus evolves as a first-rate protagonist in contemporary religious politics who from now on, according to his Life, dominates the religious debate and controversies in the east. setting aside the plain unhistoricity of the dramatic events in Jerusalem and of much, if not most, of the later detail connected with Barsauma’s role at the Council of ephesus in 449 (§ 107) and at another council in antioch (§ 107),1 it is evident that the principal concern of the author of the Life is to assign an outstanding political role to Barsauma. indeed, no other late antique saint is granted such a role by his respective hagiographer or one with such great breadth. The second part of the Life (§§ 103–165) consists almost exclusively of “imperial history,” with Barsauma negotiating in Constantinople with Theodosius ii, marcian, and other members of the imperial house, as well as high magistrates. instead of taking up the analysis of these episodes and their function in the narrative again, it is worthwhile to change our perspective on the Life. it may appear to be of little avail to ask what a saint’s vita does not report, or what lacunae can be identified in the hagiographer’s account of the hero’s public activity. in the case of the Life of Barsauma, however, a remarkable fact should not be overlooked: the Life allows us to follow the saint on his various voyages to and through Palestine and to learn about his and his disciples’ adventures and heroic feats in this region, from samaria to Jerusalem and mount sinai, from variously elaborate accounts; Barsauma’s last visit to Jerusalem, in particular, is recounted at length and makes up some 10 percent of the Life. in the second part of the Life, Barsauma’s visits to Constantinople and his interactions with the emperors and their officials are likewise 1. his presence at Chalcedon is oddly not thematized in the Life.

174

Johannes Hahn

described in numerous episodes and take up a considerable part of the text. much less can be learned about the the monk’s role at the second Council of ephesus and the Council of Chalcedon, although it was at ephesus that Barsauma reached the peak of his influence as archimandrite, being appointed to represent “the most holy archimandrites” of the east. Yet the Life is unable or unwilling to report much of anything about Barsauma and syria, and even less about Barsauma and antioch, except the—invented and historically impossible2—claim that Theodosius tried in vain to persuade the archimandrite to become the city’s archbishop (§ 105). apart from that, the saint repeatedly is said only to have passed through or rather by the metropolis of syria.3 The regions east of syria—Commagene, osrhoene, and euphratensis, the basis of Barsauma’s own monastic community—of course make an appearance in the Life. The silence on syria—then broadly under the control of the Chalcedonians—is not without significance, since we must assume that Barsauma had indeed been active there. The bishops convened in Chalcedon in 451, after accusing Barsauma of having been involved in the death of Bishop flavian of Constantinople, famously made public accusations against him (quoted at the beginning of the introduction to this volume): “Barsauma destroyed all syria. he incited thousands of monks against us. . . . Drive out the murderer Barsauma! The murderer to the stadium! anathema to Barsauma! Barsauma into exile!”4 These acclamations make plain that the archimandrite, who according to his Life focused on leading violent anti-Jewish and anti-pagan campaigns in Palestine, and in the later part of his life fought vigorously at court in Constantinople for his understanding of the right faith, must also have led another crusade or campaign for true orthodoxy in the populous and rich region of syria, the heartland of the eastern empire. The wording of the acclamations, regardless of their rhetorical exaggeration, indicates that Barsauma, at the head of his or other monks, or rather groups of monks, had attacked representatives and structures of the Chalcedonian party in syria. The archimandrite may have expelled bishops and clergy from their seats and parishes or driven out Chalcedonian monks from their monasteries and

2. see Corcoran in this volume. 3. only in § 90.3 does one find a substantial—and, at the same time, revealing—reference to antioch: “on the morning of that day Barsauma took leave of Jacob and went down to antioch. all the city came out to welcome him; but he continued down to the harbor, where he embarked on a ship bound for Palestine.” antioch, otherwise completely ignored by the author of the Life, appears in § 109.1 as a stronghold of Barsauma’s ecclesiastical enemies: “so after satan had seen that Barsauma had driven him out of many countries, he entered, envious and deceitful, the minds of the clergy of antioch. They paid a great bribe to a certain man, a pagan and a rebel, who was the general and resided there at that time. Those unprincipled men persuaded this rebel to make a stand against Barsauma.” 4. ACO ii.1.2, 116 (tr. Price and gaddis, 2:156, modified).

Conclusion: Barsauma between Hagiography and History

175

the countryside, and may thus have ‘terrorized’ the established (Chalcedonian) church with his bands of monks in the same way the Life describes his activity during his and his disciples’ travels through Palestine and into Jerusalem. modern readers of the Life or of nau’s excerpts instantly recognize the Barsauma they had previously known only as a powerful eastern archimandrite as described in the conciliar acts: here they find the same rigorous and polarizing personality, the same leadership and monastic followers, and the same terror and violence. however, from a historical point of view, we have to observe that, setting aside these personal traits and functional aspects, we encounter two different personae in our sources: the conciliar acts do not give the least indication of Barsauma’s violent activities in Palestine. They seem to be unaware of them, even though the monk’s journeys may have led him there over a period of several decades and resulted, if one can believe the Life, in clashes with the church establishment in Jerusalem (§§ 93–95).5 likewise, Barsauma’s voyages to Constantinople and his dealings with the imperial court are not mentioned in the ecclesiastical documents—unless they are tacitly subsumed under the general accusation that the monk had been responsible for the destruction and death of flavian. The Life, on the other hand, passes over in silence any significant activities by Barsauma in syria. it also does not connect him in any way to the fate of Bishop flavian. The missing links between the two categories of our limited evidence, the elaborate vita of the saint and the laconic conciliar notes, prevent any methodological way of cross-checking the information provided by the hagiographic text against the testimony of the ecclesiastical sources—it is superfluous to say that both of them are highly tendentious in their own way. While much detail of the Life, from a purely historical perspective, may be dismissed or ignored as requisite hagiographic embellishment and motifs, and the legendary, highly exaggerated character of the narrative can also be ascribed to the genre of vitae of late antique saints, a fundamental question remains: To what extent does this biography of an ascetic, with its rich array of adventures and pious stories, rely on or reflect historical events? how can such a text be critically used for historical purposes? or must we be satisfied with a rather general, eclectic, and partisan grasp of the spiritual and religious climate of the hero’s (or the hagiographer’s) lifetime, together with some incidental “hard” data and peripheral information?

5. for a possible chronology, see andrew Palmer, “a Tale of Two synods: The archimandrite Barsumas at ephesus in 449 and at Chalcedon in 451,” Journal of Eastern Christian Studies 66 (2014): 37-61. it may, however, be noted that the number of Barsauma’s pilgrimages to Palestine—according to the Life four—can be contested: the earliest one, as a child (thus dating to about 400), may well be an invention of the hagiographer. it is impossible to securely date the subsequent voyages; Palmer tries to argue for ca. 422, 438, and 442(?).

176

Johannes Hahn

several of the contributions to this volume ask precisely these questions and come to largely congruent conclusions. Central claims of the Life cannot only not be corroborated by external evidence, but, as far as can be argued when faced with inescapably incomplete evidence, directly disproved. There exists not only no archaeological evidence for the violent destruction of a late antique synagogue in Palestine, but, as günter stemberger has been able to show, Barsauma’s alleged, and extensively described, destruction of a synagogue in rabbat moab is to be rejected on strong archaeological, geographical, and historical grounds. at the same time, one can easily cite literary motifs and models that uncover the ideas that drove the hagiographer to include this fictitious story in his narrative. although one may recognize the Life as a “hagiographic masterpiece” (Daniel Caner) and acknowledge from the start that it is an exceedingly fictitious account of the life of a famous syrian saint, the text should not be dismissed as a purely literary product, as simple fiction. not only is its hero, Barsauma, a historical figure and powerful archimandrite who set up and led a strong ascetic community and founded an important monastery of lasting impact in the region;6 an extensive collection of miracles and stories has also emerged from the immediate environment of Barsauma and his monastery. The Life was written to preserve the memory of the most important achievements and events of the life of the saint and drew for this purpose from the collective recollections of his community. But the Life is not the result of much later aspirations to produce some written account of the long-deceased founder of the monastery in order to meet liturgical needs and to satisfy the requirements of a saint’s cult that only later began to flourish. on the basis of the studies in this volume, in particular chapters 1 and 6, it seems beyond question that the Life, as the second colophon (§ 165) claims, was indeed written, at least at its core, by a disciple of Barsauma and that it dates to, most probably, soon after Barsauma’s death in 456. it also seems at least plausible that the Life comprises recollections of other disciples or contemporary witnesses. some of these are clearly identifiable and deserve to be trusted. Prosopographical data and considerations allow insightful conclusions. The existence and violent death of Bishop Zachariah of samosata, alias “Zut.o the mountaineer” (§ 103), who is distinguished as being Barsauma’s fellow student, are beyond doubt, although only the Life attests to this person. earlier in the Life (§ 12.1), Zachariah had already, and independently, been mentioned as a close 6. see andrew Palmer, “The West-syrian monastic founder Bars. awmo: a historical review of the scholarly literature,” in Orientalia Christiana: Festschrift für Hubert Kaufhold zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. Peter Bruns and heinz otto luthe, eichstätter Beiträge zum Christlichen orient 3 (Wiesbaden: harrassowitz, 2013), 399–413; and ernest honigmann, Le couvent de Barsauma et le patriarcat jacobite d’Antioche et de Syrie, CsCo 146, subsidia 7 (louvain: imprimerie orientaliste l. Durbecq, 1954) for the history of the community.

Conclusion: Barsauma between Hagiography and History

177

friend of Barsauma. in § 103 again he is described as known “among the brethren” as Zut.o. like gemellinus, bishop of Perrha, mentioned here (§ 103), Zachariah clearly belonged to a network of non-Chalcedonian leaders. however, it is impossible to place Zachariah chronologically in the very deficient list of samosatan bishops. nevertheless, we must assume very close and important relations between Zachariah and Barsauma. The former occupied, for an unknown period, the episcopal seat of the provincial capital of Commagene, and Barsauma’s monastery was situated in the chora of samosata.7 and it should be noted that it is the murder of Zachariah that prompts Barsauma to visit the emperor Theodosius ii in Constantinople (§§ 103.3–105.4), and thus starts the narrative of the later part of the Life. The historicity of some of the prosopographical information preserved in the Life, including the existence of a network of non-Chalcedonian bishops and archimandrites,8 should thus be beyond question. Unfortunately, the Life, following a common hagiographic practice, anonymizes protagonists on several occasions,9 so that our overall prosopographical insight is clearly restricted. To identify different, in particular later, layers of traditon is a much more difficult task. it makes sense to assume that additions or contaminations would more likely be found in the core episodes of the Life—Barsauma’s dealings in Jerusalem and his interactions with the emperors in Constantinople. But the strong nonChalcedonian stance of these episodes does not necessarily mean that such details were added or revisions made much later.10 on the contrary, none of the information in the Life seems to contradict a late fifth-century date. Thus, with the full Life in hand, we are in a position to ask any scholar who still favors a later dating of the Barsauma tradition, or parts of it, for positive proof. in a way, this clarification helps to define a new starting point for tackling the, from a historian’s point of view, primary question connected with the Life: the riddle of the possible historicity of events described by the hagiographer, and, more specifically, the problem of the authenticity or credibility of information preserved in this unique text. from the outset it must be acknowledged that exaggeration and inflation of historical events and of Barsauma’s role in them are a key strategy of the Life, far beyond what is familiar from other hagiographic sources. The Life asserts an enormous public significance for Barsauma, presenting him not simply as an agent in various religious debates or conflicts, but as a powerful protagonist in imperial religious policy, fighting, for example, not only a single urban Jewish community but assembled parts of the entire empire’s Jewish population, 103,000 believers 7. see also §§ 89 and 149 for the close relation of Barsauma and his monastery with samosata. 8. for Bishop rabbula of edessa as a highly likely additional candidate for this network, see below. 9. on this practice, see Corcoran in this volume. 10. see menze in the introduction.

178

Johannes Hahn

who have come together to celebrate one of the most important festivals of their religion. To this purpose the Life has its hero interact intensively with members of the imperial house: Barsauma meets eudocia several times, and, of course, Theodosius ii. marcian and Pulcheria are also presented in close relation with and as opponents of the achimandrite. Twice it is even suggested that Barsauma was on his way to see Valentinian iii, the Western emperor.11 Barsauma’s close relationship with Theodosius ii, in particular, is extensively recorded. however, as simon Corcoran demonstrates in his meticulous analysis, most of these personal contacts and exchanges were invented by the Life’s author. The multiple visits to the emperor and to Constantinople, the similar treatment of imperial letters to and on behalf of Barsauma, and the highly exaggerated issue of the handing over of the imperial seal ring, bestowing the emperor’s own authority over the church on Barsauma, all contribute to the enhancement of the saint’s prestige and authority within and outside the church. nevertheless, there can hardly remain any doubt, as Corcoran has also shown, that Barsauma met Theodosius ii in person at least once in Constantinople, and thus that this visit is indeed historical, as is the existence of an imperial letter and personal invitation to Barsauma to participate in the Council of ephesus, contained in the acts of the council. how close Barsauma’s relations with Theodosius were is a different matter. here, the Life’s far-reaching claims, supported with letters that are clearly fabricated, inspire little confidence. We have to assume that the same technique of exaggeration and multiplication to overstate Barsauma’s power and significance has been used in other instances as well. The four alleged journeys to Palestine are one obvious case—the earliest, of the child Barsauma, clearly an invention—Barsauma’s dealings with eudocia in Palestine being another. Jan Willem Drijvers has made clear that these anecdotes, the events on the Temple mount, and eudocia’s role as pro-Jewish catalyst of these events are deeply indebted to historical incidents under emperor Julian and related apologetic traditions and have to be judged as an ahistorical fabrication and a literary construct. Yet it seems unlikely that these episodes are not somehow based on a historical visit of Barsauma to Jerusalem, possibly including a clash with Jewish mourners at the Temple mount, on the one hand, and an encounter of the monk with the empress, on the other. The latter could quite well have taken place in Palestine at the time of one of eudocia’s visits, in 438 or 442, but did not necessarily, we may assume, happen in Jerusalem proper. even anti-Jewish actions of Barsauma and some of his disciples in Palestine should not be casually dismissed as ahistorical or simply fabricated by the Life’s author. Their prominence and extensive discussion in the Life, though highly

11. for details of all these relations, see Corcoran in this volume.

Conclusion: Barsauma between Hagiography and History

179

tendentious and instrumental to the author’s purposes, prohibit the assumption that Barsauma did not somehow physically confront Jews in their own environment. That the story of his destruction of an enormous synagogue in rabbat moab is an invention of the hagiographer, again adorned with details freely taken from the literary tradition, has convincingly been shown by günter stemberger. still, there remains the open question of whether Barsauma, who through his actions earned, in the Life at least, great fame for destroying holy places of other religious groups, may not indeed have attacked Jewish meeting places and pagan temples. in the early fifth century such infringements became so endemic in the east that they triggered a series of imperial laws to stop anti-Jewish and anti-pagan Christian attacks.12 although many of the “historical” stories in the Life cannot be given historical credibility, the fantastic detail, the clear instrumentalization, and the blatant hagiographic agenda behind them should not lead us so far astray as to assume that they all are completely free inventions, nothing more than hagiographic motifs transferred into fabricated pseudo-historical stories to entertain and edify pious Christian listeners and readers. it is not only our certain knowledge, based on the acts of the Council of ephesus in 449 and Chalcedon in 451, that Barsauma indeed held an unique position in eastern monasticism and that emperor Theodosius personally invited the archimandrite to the second Council of ephesus that prevents us from regarding all such information as simply fictitious. it is also the important fact that all, or almost all, of this material was collected by disciples of the saint soon after his death to remember and, in hagiographic form, to preserve the most striking aspects of his personality and ascetic practice, the most meaningful deeds of his activity as a holy man in the ecclesiastical and public spheres, both nearby and far away, and the most notable struggles and opponents in his unremitting fight for the right faith. since the Life saw constant use in the community Barsauma had founded himself, many of the archimandrite’s disciples and fellow brethren will have maintained vivid and authentic memories of the spiritual and communal life under Barsauma’s leadership. likewise, they will have remembered their archimandrite’s spectacular activities outside the monastery, in some cases based on their personal participation. of course, any such memories could easily have been embellished with dramatic detail or grossly exaggerated facts and figures or even been distorted to the extent that they disguise much of the original event. But it is not plausible that the basic framework of the Life and the fundamental conflicts to which it gives special attention would have been entirely invented.

12. The legislation and historical context have been discussed by stemberger in his contribution to this volume.

180

Johannes Hahn

Barsauma’s journey(s) to Palestine, his encounter with eudocia, his antiJudaism, his violent actions, his attacks on holy places, and so on thus must refer to actual events and issues central to his life and his achievements, as indefinite as these may be in detail and as unreliable as the surviving record of them may be. for several decades beyond the time of the composition of the Life eyewitnesses to the events it describes still lived in Barsauma’s monastery; it is not inconceivable that these disciples would have queried or contested blatant inventions with regard to the actions of their spiritual father. of course, it is difficult from a historian’s point of view to draw clear conclusions and hard facts from this argument. even when we accept or assume, for instance, the historicity of an encounter between Barsauma and eudocia, and also concede that this took place somewhere in Palestine, any assumptions regarding the character of this exchange remain speculative. nevertheless, instead of condemning episodes containing false information, anachronistic elements, or otherwise incompatible messages or gross historical errors as literary constructs, we can now ask whether some kernel or major element of the narrative or argument preserved in an episode may mirror or refer to an authentic bit of information or aspect of Barsauma’s biography or environment. indeed, there are good arguments for accepting the basic authenticity and overall historical significance of several episodes in the Life, although they are, at first sight at least, difficult to contextualize. The detailed analysis in chapter 6 of the Life’s record of Barsauma’s visit to samaria (§§ 80, 84) and his encounters with members of the samaritan community there revealed remarkable authentic detail and demonstrated that his relations with other religious groups could be of a different kind in significant ways.13 Barsauma’s dealings with these samaritans disrupt the image otherwise drawn in the Life of a violent ascetic zealot who in principle treats people with other beliefs as enemies who must be fought without compromise. The episodes also contain important information about the religious situation in this part of Palestine. This is also true, for example, of Barsauma’s intervention in a territorial dispute between two towns located on the upper euphrates (§ 98). We are not told the exact nature of the dispute and lack other information, but we can clearly grasp, behind the miraculous elements of the story, its historical kernel and reconstruct economic and other conditions of this local conflict. every hagiographic vita takes a selective approach to serve its agenda, the glorification of its hero. it is easily overlooked that Barsauma’s Life, with its focus on the saint’s extreme asceticism, contains, scattered over the text and its often loosely connected episodes, a uniquely rich array of information about the livelihood of the rural population in the hinterland of Barsauma’s monastery, the mountainous

13. see the contribution of hahn in this volume.

Conclusion: Barsauma between Hagiography and History

181

regions of Commagene and osrhoene. The cultivation and consumption of local plants, the ever-precarious supply of foodstuffs because of famine and pestilence, and the rural poor’s simple diet (which also forms the basis of Barsauma’s and his monks’ own ascetic diet) are significant observations. The hagiographer’s attention to and knowledge of Barsauma’s interaction with village life and villagers in the territories close to his monastery, which support the hagiographer’s claim to be a disciple of Barsauma and member of the archimandrite’s community, stand in stark contrast to the lack of information on the area’s urban environment and Barsauma’s relation to town dwellers. The ascetic “who dwells in the northern massif ” (§ 77.2) is neither here nor elsewhere depicted as entering a city other than Jerusalem, as we previously noted with respect to antioch, even though a dozen cities or so are mentioned in the Life. Barsauma’s anti-urban attitude is, in a way, particularly striking in his immediate environment, in Commagene and northern mesopotamia, where it had been shaped. as clear as it is that Barsauma was an eminent local figure, powerful not only in his congregation but in the local communities nearby and in the wider area of the “northern massif,” we can grasp little of his influence beyond his effectiveness among and for the benefit of the rural population at large. episodes remembering him in his role as a patron of the poor, dealing with powerful persons, regularly “anonymize” places and counterparts, and speak of “a certain village,” “another town,” or “a certain city.” in § 98.1, “two large towns on the river euphrates,” again unnamed (presumably Zeugma and seleucia apamea), approach the saint to solve a territorial dispute between them. however, here, as in the other episodes in the region, Barsauma acts solely in the role of a holy man, as benefactor or mediator, or by punishing malefactors. We do not see him involved in religious conflicts in his home territory.14 neither Jews nor pagans find any mention here; no doctrinal disputes challenge the archimandrite’s authority or demand his intervention in the public realm. This portrayal stands in remarkable contrast to the Lives of other famous ascetics who earned and established their reputations as champions of the right faith in their immediate environment: they purge local societies of infidels, Jews, and heretics and establish their renown before they rise to regional or imperial fame as fighters for orthodoxy. geography is thus of considerable significance in the Life, far beyond its structuring function for the narrative of Barsauma’s biography and achievements. Commagene, Jerusalem, samaria, rabbat moab, ephesus, Chalcedon, Constantinople— 14. it is only in § 103, which marks the transition to the second part of the Life, moving Barsauma to Constantinople and the imperial court, that “Barsauma came into protracted conflict with perverse heresies” (§ 99.2). The murder of his former fellow student Zachariah, bishop of samosata, prompts Barsauma to travel to the capital and obtain an audience with the emperor Theodosius.

182

Johannes Hahn

all represent particular spiritual, social, and political arenas charged with meaning for the potency and the agenda of the saint and fulfill, as several contributions in this volume demonstrate, different purposes, with Jerusalem as the outstanding example. The hagiographer’s strong focus on Barsauma’s mobility and itinerancy throughout his career serves as an important literary means to “construct” the monk as a saint—a procedure less formal, but by no means less effective, than the unusual structure of ninety-nine “signs” that otherwise builds the backbone of the Life. still, the Life insists that the saint spent his ascetic life overwhelmingly in solitary existence as a recluse. To this spiritual base, a cave near his monastery, he regularly returns after being called away to suffering villagers or townspeople in the vicinity or neighboring districts. To battle pagans and Jews and to punish heretics, the hagiographer first has him leave his familiar environment and travel far away, “after the necessary mental preparations” (§ 76.1). Barsauma is transmuted into the wandering holy man from the rough landscapes of “the north,” the mountainous and secluded regions of Commagene and neighboring osrhoene, to take up the mission of cleansing the sacred realm of the holy land, and Jerusalem in particular. he successfully purges the holy City of the presence of the Jewish other and reprimands the empress eudocia and the city’s clergy. his “crusade” against Jews, samaritans, and pagans and their sanctuaries in Palestine is, at the same time, styled as a pilgrimage, rather thinly clad in the guise of a Christian practice of an essentially spiritual experience. The hagiographer’s narrative strategies in dealing with the archimandrite’s implacable public agenda blur and inescapably reduce and distort the historical Barsauma. This critical analysis of the historical credibility of the Life may appear ambivalent or even disappointing. our inability to offer an unambiguous answer, to provide an instrumentarium that would allow us to assess any single episode or piece of information, even to draw or reconstruct a detailed outline of the public career of Barsauma, the later saint, is based on the simple circumstance that we do not possess, besides the few conciliar notes discussed above: any further external evidence on Barsauma with which to precisely contextualize and methodologically deconstruct the hagiographic tradition as it has come down to us in the Life. it has to be noted that even these two source traditions are brought together only with difficulty. The two images we gain of the archimandrite in the ecclesiastical documents, on the one hand, and in the Life, on the other, can be seen only as complementary, but they do not mesh. Their common ground is only the intimidating personality and agenda of the archimandrite, his involvement in religious struggles and doctrinal conflicts, his relentless fight against his enemies, his forceful leadership of violent monks, and the recognition of his outstanding reputation and his striking geographical outreach. The key problem is that we lack additional, different sources without a hagiographic agenda. But we should be aware that these, when available, could produce

Conclusion: Barsauma between Hagiography and History

183

an entirely different image and historical profile of Barsauma, and transform our ascetic into a totally different kind of historical persona. This at least is suggested when we widen our perspective, take a comparative approach, and analyze the biographical documentation of two other monastic protagonists in the fifthcentury religious controversies of the east. The one contemporary figure who presumably most resembles our syrian archimandrite is shenoute of atripe (Panopolis) in Upper egyt. he also was head of a large monastic community, a zealous fighter against heretics and pagans, destroyed sanctuaries, was a member of the entourage of Patriarch Cyril at a church synod, in ephesus in 431, and was actively involved in the monastic terror that deeply affected this “robber council.” This figure is well known from his Life, allegedly written by his pupil and successor Besa.15 The text, very much like the Life of Barsauma, depicts its hero as a model saint, empowered to perform astonishing miracles, to defeat pagans and heretics, to destroy temples together with his monks, to support the poor, to free captives, to rebuke clerics and bishops, even to communicate in the monastery’s chapel with Jesus in person or to travel on a cloud overseas, and much more. shenoute thus appears in his Life as a broadly literary figure with supernatural powers, with the help of which he meets typical expectations projected onto a holy man of the age, but who is at the same time deeply entangled in conflicts of many kinds. for the modern reader who only had the Life with its highly hagiographic episodes in hand, it would be impossible to uncover and evaluate the historical basis, precise nature, and interpretive value of the affairs of the world in which shenoute is represented to have been involved. however, the historical persona of shenoute becomes tangible for us, for example, in the monumental church he built for his monastery in atripe, which reflects the abbot’s lifelong fight against paganism in its architecture and deliberate reuse of spolia, and confirms that he exercised powerful leadership over a community of several thousand monks. But shenoute is even easier to grasp, sometimes in astonishing historical detail, in his own writings, all in Coptic, comprising letters, discourses, homilies, and monastic rules, which have been preserved in voluminous codices in his monastery. only here can we adequately grasp the historical 15. The best starting point for looking at shenoute, his life, times, and writings is the excellent introduction by David Brakke and andrew Crislip in their highly commendable collection, Selected Discourses of Shenoute the Great: Community, Theology, and Social Conflict in Late Antique Egypt (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), 1–34. in addition, see in particular nina lubomierski, Die Vita Sinuthii, studien und Texte zu antike und Christentum 45 (Tübingen: mohr siebeck, 2007); and ariel g. lópez, Shenoute of Atripe and the Uses of Poverty: Rural Patronage, Religious Conflict, and Monasticism in Late Antique Egypt, Transformation of the Classical heritage 50 (Berkeley and los angeles: University of California Press, 2013). for an english translation of shenoute’s Life, see David n. Bell, tr., intr., Besa: The Life of Shenoute, Cistercian studies 73 (Kalamazoo, mi: Cistercian Publications, 1983).

184

Johannes Hahn

shenoute, indeed the paramount personality of still-nascent Coptic Christianity in Upper egypt in the fourth and fifth centuries, and can comprehend his personality, his biography, his spiritual, theological, and political battles, the social and political context of his public activities, and his involvement in the great theological debates and ecclesiastic struggles of the age. his enormous importance in and impact on society, politics, and the church not only in Panopolis and its hinterland but in the whole of Upper egypt cannot even be guessed from his Life. geographically and ecclesiastically closer to Barsauma, we have another syrian monk, rabbula, again a fierce partisan of the non-Chalcedonian cause, who, in his Life, is likewise praised for his violent campaigns against pagans, “heretics,” and Jews, and for having destroyed four temples and a synagogue. Unlike Barsauma, he accomplished these deeds not in faraway Palestine but in edessa, the seat of his bishopric.16 in his case we again have the opportunity to check his feats in the Life against some external evidence. rabbula’s extant writings are much fewer than shenoute’s, and some of dubious authenticity, but the correspondence, hymns, a homily, and the monastic rulings still allow us to get some grasp of the personality and programme of this monk-bishop, and to scrutinize and contextualize some of the claims of the hagiographic account of his life. it may be noted that these two important monastic and ecclesiastical leaders of the syriac Church, Barsauma and rabbula, although contemporaries and “brothers in spirit,” and living less than 100 km apart, are nowhere reported to have been in contact with each other—a very unlikely constellation.17 hagiography is a highly selective, and, indeed, with respect to biographical information, arbitrary genre. it overemphasizes and, from the historian’s view, at the same time readily decontextualizes and isolates its heroes. Unlike shenoute and rabbula, Barsauma left no personal testimonies, no sermons, no written instructions for his monastic congregation, no theological writings.18 and Barsauma’s community, which flourished after his death and built 16. These feats are clearly used by the hagiographer to legitimize and idealize rabbula the bishop. for the character of this Life, see georg g. Blum, Rabbula von Edessa: Der Christ, der Bischof, der Theologe, CsCo 300, subsidia 34 (louvain: secrétariat du CorpussCo, 1969), 5–14; glen W. Bowersock, “The syriac life of rabbula and syrian hellenism,” in Greek Biography and Panegyrics in Late Antiquity, ed. Tomas hägg and Philip rousseau, Transformation of the Classical heritage 31 (Berkeley and los angeles: University of California Press, 2000), 255–71; and most recently Phenix and horn, The Rabbula Corpus, xxvii-xlv. 17. still, a link can be detected: gemellinus, bishop of Perrha, an important correspondent of rabbula (see the bishop’s Epistula ad Gemellinum) is mentioned in the Life (§ 12.1) and distinguished, on the very day of his episcopal ordination, with a vision “about the champion (ἀθλητής) Barsauma” there. 18. The Life explains (§ 21) that Barsauma was “throughout the winter preaching long sermons to the brethren while they were eating their supper.” in the context it is not clear whether these were oral teachings or based on writings. in the case that they existed as texts, they did not survive.

Conclusion: Barsauma between Hagiography and History

185

up an important monastery in the region, did not, as far as we can see, preserve any writings of the revered founder, although the saint’s Life was widely disseminated and his cult long-lasting. in the end, Barsauma remains, all in all, an opaque, even enigmatic person to us. Despite numerous indications in the Life of his extraordinary importance in contemporary monasticism, theological debates, and ecclesiastical controversies, of his putative influence on leading figures of the age, and in particular of his unremitting and merciless battles agains Jews, pagans, and other infidels and their sacred places, his Life represents first and foremost an impressive piece of late antique hagiography. it glorifies a notoriously violent ascetic zealot and transforms him into a venerated, powerful saint. it declares Barsauma’s mystical visions, spiritual authority, and miraculous powers as being the result of his extreme ascetic hardships and his divinely blessed piety, and it elaborates and demonstrates this with a plethora of “signs.” however, at the same time, this syrian holy man’s Life is a remarkable testimony to partisan hagiography inasmuch as it presents its protagonist in all his endeavors and heroic feats as an unwavering champion of true orthodoxy from the non-Chalcedonian perspective. The saint’s activities, in particular his confrontation and interactions with eudocia in Jerusalem and with Theodosius ii in Constantinople, are all expressions of negotiating a non-Chalcedonian identity in a late antique syriac-speaking milieu. The Life unfolds a saint’s biography and narrates history with a powerful agenda, and it accomplishes it against the background and in the context of the great religious controversies of the epoch.

appendix

The life of Barsauma Translated by Andrew Palmer

§ 1 The story of the heroic deeds of the chosen one and head of the mourners,1 the holy and God-clothed teacher (Syriac: rabbo), Barsauma the Northerner.2 His prayer be with us, Amen!3 1 in every age and in every generation there have been righteous men (syriac: zaddīqē) in the creation; and one righteous man (zaddīqo) outstrips another by his love, just as one star outshines another in magnitude; and one champion (ἀθλητής) is as far superior in performance to another as the sun in brightness to the moon. 2 in Barsauma’s time there were many mourners (syriac: abīlē), but the perfection (syriac: gmīrūto) of this one surpassed all others; and in his generation many righteous men were found, but his athleticism was superior to the rest. in fact, one might almost say it is unheard of in the history of the world for beings of flesh and blood to perform athletic feats such as his. That, at least, is my opinion. §2

The first sign.4

1 The beginning of this man’s recognition as one chosen by god5 was as follows. There lived in the wilderness a holy man, whose name was Joseph. This righteous man lived long ago, before Barsauma’s fame began to be known in the world. Translated from manuscript 12/17 of the syrian orthodox Patriarchal Collection, copied out in 1185/6. andrew Palmer, who made the present streamlined ad sensum version, is preparing a critical edition of the text and a literal translation. 1. a “mourner” (cf. mt 5:4) was a monk, distinguishable by his dress and appearance, who practiced extreme asceticism. 2. a “northerner” was a man from the Taurus mountains; cf. §§ 33.2, 64.4, 68.1, and 155.4. 3. italics signify heading written with red ink. 4. Cf. Jn 2:11. 5. lit. “The beginning of Barsauma’s chosenness.”

187

188

The Life of Barsauma

2 from his (isolated) station, this righteous man was the first to make Barsauma’s chosen status known. he was speaking to a crowd of people who had come to see him. “mark my words!” he said. “a certain righteous man will soon be revealed to the world. his name is Barsauma. now the righteousness of this man surpasses that of all his generation, as John the Baptist surpassed all those born from women.”6 3 Those who were listening to Joseph asked him: “Where did you get this knowledge from? are you perhaps a prophet?” he replied: “i am no prophet. i saw this in a divine vision.” and that holy man used to tell what he had learned from his vision in the presence of all men. § 3A The second sign. Dogs bite him.7 1 This Barsauma, who would be the most excellent of mourners, was born in a village called Beth awton in the district (χῶρα) of samosata.8 While he was still a little child, his father died. his mother, whose name was sakhiya, became the wife of a man in another village. Barsauma went there with his mother. 2 about this time the little Barsauma happened to be alone one day in a field when some aggressive dogs came on him on their way back (to the village) from the sheep. When these dogs saw that the child was alone, they growled at him fiercely, ran up and seized him, then trotted off again, carrying him between their teeth. 3 The dogs had been dragging him along for some time between their teeth when some men from that village came across the field. When they saw the dogs pulling at the child Barsauma, the men thought they were fighting over some animal. 4 Coming closer, however, they discovered Barsauma on his back in the middle, with each of the dogs pulling him in a different direction. Picking up sticks and stones, they rescued the child from the dogs. When they were close enough to examine him, they looked for the marks of the dogs’ teeth, but they could not see even the slightest scratch on him. 5 all this came to pass because of the trials to which the devil would one day subject him, and because of his future struggles with the pagans and the wars of the heresies; for in due course these, too, would attack Barsauma. By this men already knew, when Barsauma was but a child, that victory was his as a chosen one, destined to win all his contests and be delivered from all harms. for just as he fell into the jaws of savage dogs without any harm to his body, so he was destined to fall into deep contests without any harm to his soul. 6 The men who had rescued Barsauma from the dogs stood there in amazement at what they had seen. one of them, filled with grace, made a kind of prophecy: “if i am alive, brothers, i shall remind you. But if i am dead (by the time it happens), you will have to remember what i now say. This child has been chosen by god to be his instrument.9 he is destined to attain high rank in god’s service. This sign which has been seen in him was not performed for nothing.” When the child Barsauma heard the man saying this, it occurred to him that he ought to go out into the wilderness.

6. 7. 8. 9.

mt 11:11. This heading is written opposite the second paragraph of the chapter, but it belongs here. The village of Beth ʻawton is otherwise unknown. samosata: Barrington atlas 67, h1. Cf. acts 9:15.

The Life of Barsauma

189

§ 3[B]10 7 When the day came for the great fair of samosata, Barsauma’s relatives went into town, taking the child with them. But he left them there in samosata and ran away, following the course of the euphrates which flows past that city. and as he walked along the riverbank, he began to weep. 8 now by the grace of god he encountered there a certain distinguished mourner called abraham, dedicated to holy poverty (syriac: msarqo). When this man saw the little child, he said to him: “Why are you crying? Where do you come from? and where are you going?” Barsauma answered: “sir, i am an orphan. my father is dead. i want to become a slave11 of Christ.” 9 abraham replied: “Where do you mean to go and labor for Christ?” To this, Barsauma responded: “i want, sir, to go into the wilderness, where no people walk.”12 abraham answered: “my son, you are a child. The wilderness is a very difficult place. You cannot live there on your own.” 10 Barsauma was as innocent as a lamb. he believed every word. When he heard this he panicked. he was overcome by dizziness and did not know what to say in reply. so abraham spoke again to the little child: “suppose someone were to do you a kindness for our lord’s sake and take you to a monastery! Would you run away?” 11 Then Barsauma answered: “i promise you before god that i shall never stop following the way i have started on.” Then abraham took charge of him; and he went with him. and when they arrived at the next monastery on their way, he urged the monks to accept the child Barsauma. 12 at this the child Barsauma began to weep out loud and said to abraham: “sir, if god wanted me to stay here, he would have led me here directly. as it is, it is clear that he wants me to stay with you, because it is you that i first met with.” When abraham heard this, he felt sorry; so he took charge of Barsauma. from there on the child followed him. 13 afterward other disciples attached themselves to them. These also attained a high rank in god’s service and a name in the world. one of them, who had achieved great heights of asceticism by the time he ended his days, performed many signs during his life and more after his death. amazing powers and miracles are manifested through his bones. 14 This man rose to be a bishop. i could tell a great deal about him. as it is, god has recorded all his victorious deeds in the Book of life in the heavenly Jerusalem. eventually abraham departed from this world, leaving his disciples while they were still young. §4

The first distinction. First pilgrimage to Jerusalem.

1 it occurred to the young Barsauma that he ought to make a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. he wore rags of sackcloth, of double thickness, patched together with thick threads of wool

10. The copyist who added headings to the text omitted to add one here. 11. Cf. heb 3:5. 12. Cf. 1 Kgs 17:2–6 (elijah); mt 3:1–3 (John the Baptist), 4:1 (Jesus); cf. mk 1:3–4, 1:12–13 ; lk 3:2–4, 4:1; Jn 1:23; heb 11:38 (all the holy men of the time before Christ).

190

The Life of Barsauma

and hair. he resolved to wear no shoes, not even sandals, on his journey; to take neither purse, nor bag, nor stick, nor food from one place to another; neither to enter a village, nor to pass through a city; and to accept neither silver, nor bronze.13 Thus he went and thus he returned, all the way to the east. 2 now at that time pagans abounded in Palestine, Phoenicia, and arabia. Christians were as yet few in number in those countries. The Jews and the samaritans, on the other hand, were rich. They persecuted the Christians of that region. seeing that Barsauma was a young lad and that there was no one else with him, they beat and tormented him in every place before they drove him out. §5

The second distinction. He undergoes a winter ordeal in the open air.

1 after Barsauma had returned to the region of the east, he set out again to go to a certain desolate mountain on his own. he was there throughout the winter under snow and ice. as for food, he received none there from any man, but he would gather the wild herbs from places that were denuded of snow and get nourishment from these. 2 in april he went to another mountain both high and cold. There he fed on grassroots, until the fruit of the wild trees ripened. for he found some wild trees and stayed there, eating of their fruit, until winter. 3 in the first month of that winter he entered a certain village. now this village is situated in the high northern massif. in that village there were some people who knew his parents. Those people told Barsauma that he should stay there with them. They would build him a monastery. § 6 The third distinction. He builds a cave, thinking he will die of hardship. 1 Barsauma decided to stay there and build himself a cave-den in one of the rocky cliffs, intending to stay there on his own that winter and die of hunger; for much snow falls in that country and then no one is able to go from place to place. for this reason Barsauma thought that, when snow fell in the winter and no one was able to come to him, he would starve to death. 2 By the providence of god, who takes care of everything, Barsauma went and found, in a certain big cliff, a little den in which a she-bear lived; for there used to be much wildlife in that country. That winter he lived in that den. The grace of god provided for him. he did not die. By the summer he had welcomed one disciple and by the next year, two or three more. §7

The fourth distinction. He adopts a standing posture.

1 from then on Barsauma began to practice great hardships. it so happened that when he was lying on the ground under heaven and gazing at the stars, fear and trembling suddenly fell on him. he reasoned as follows: “how do i presume to lie on my side, while god is standing and looking at me? if a slave does not presume to lie down in the presence of his fleshly lord, how can i lie down in the presence of the lord of heaven and earth?” Because

13. Cf. mt 10:5–15; mk 6:7–13; lk 10:2–12.

The Life of Barsauma

191

of this thought he leapt to his feet and remained standing in fear, offering worship and prayer assiduously in the presence of god. 2 Then he pursued the same line of reasoning: “if a disciple does not presume to sit down in the presence of his master, how can i, weak as i am, sit down in the presence of the master of all Creatures?” from that moment onward he crucified himself by night and by day. indeed, he refused to lie or sit down again until the day of his death, a period of fifty-four years. §8

The fifth distinction.

1 now at the time when Barsauma began to crucify himself in the presence of god, he had not heard of anybody on earth who neither lay nor sat down; but from about that time this practice began among the brethren. §9

The third sign. A loaf of bread increases.

1 When Barsauma first bound himself to this hardship, god gave him the following sign. in that den in which they dwelt he and his disciples had just one loaf of barley bread. This they placed on the table on sunday. all ate of it, and more than half was left. on monday they put it on the table again, ate of it, and were satisfied; and it remained the same. on Tuesday they put it on the table again. all of them ate their fill, yet it was none the smaller. for seven days they ate of it in this way; and it stayed as it was.14 § 10 The sixth distinction. He practices abstinence. 1 after this, Barsauma decided to deprive himself15 of bread; and—the seventh distinction—of wine; and—the eighth distinction—of oil; and—the ninth distinction—of water; and—the tenth distinction—of everything that is sown with the aid of a plow; and— the eleventh distinction—he practiced this extreme hardship for fifty-four years. 2 The twelfth distinction. he fasted from one sunday to the next throughout the winter. on sundays he would partake of some salad and fruit. The thirteenth distinction. in the summer he would eat once every two days. 3 he maintained this invariable custom not only in his monastery, but also on the road. Throughout those fifty-four years he did not break his rule. his way of life was the same from the beginning to the end, from youth to old age. 4 it was with reason that this abstinent man was called bar-sauma (bar-s.awmo: “son of fasting”). from his early youth master fasting was his tutor; and mistress Prayer was wet-nurse to the child. The prophet said: “my father and my mother abandoned me and the lord gathered me up.”16 This prophecy was fulfilled in Barsauma; for, when he was young, his father and mother abandoned him, and the lord took him under his wing. By nature he was still innocent, in speech simple, unschooled in the secular curriculum,17 but wise in the lord; for “the beginning of wisdom is the fear of the lord.”18 14. Cf. 1 Kgs 17:8–16; mt 14:15–21, 15:32–38; mk 6:35–44, 8:1–9; lk 9:12–17; Jn 6:5–13. 15. The verb etnzar, “deprive himself,” is cognate with the hebrew word for a nazirite (cf. nm 6; Jgs 13:4–7, 16f.; am 2:11f.). 16. Ps 27:10. 17. lit. “a layman (greek: ἰδιώτης) in the learning of human literature.” 18. Prv 9:10.

192

The Life of Barsauma

5 [now because it was appropriate for the following, also, to be fulfilled in Barsauma’s case: “god has chosen the fools of the world that he might put the wise to shame through them”19—and even if this was originally written about the apostles, but it can also be extended to many; and this same thing also happened in truth about Barsauma.]20 § 11

The fourteenth distinction. On prayer. The fourth sign. A tongue of fire comes down on him from heaven.

1 one day he went, as was his custom, to a certain place far away from the brethren, in order to pray there passionately on his own. now a certain monk, who happened to be passing (that way), watched him while he was praying. Unaware that there was someone watching him, Barsauma began to groan out loud, shedding tears of profound emotion while he prayed. 2 one moment he was pleading with god with great passion, the next a great light flashed from heaven and came down to earth in the likeness of fire. What appeared to be a bolt of lightning stopped just above Barsauma and was changed. like a tongue of fire now, it trickled down over his mouth and was swallowed up inside him. 3 The monk was deserving enough to see this miracle clearly. afterward he walked back to the great congregation of people who were then in that place and told them everything that he had seen. “This brother Barsauma, who is considered by us to be simple and unschooled, has received from our lord the gift which was given to the holy apostles. so long as i am left standing, i shall remind you (of this): from now on this man’s wisdom will be superior to that of all the scribes and teachers. his teaching will be spoken of in distant countries.” § 12

The fifth sign. Bishop Gemellinus has a vision about him and his fellow disciple Zut.o.

1 around the same time a certain gemellinus became bishop of Perrha.21 now many were aware that this man had been chosen by the holy spirit. on the day of his episcopal ordination, he had a vision from the holy spirit about the champion (ἀθλητής) Barsauma and about his friend Zachariah, who was known among the brethren as Zut.o. This was before the bishop came to know where they were, for as yet neither of their names was generally known. 2 When he had found them, after making careful inquiries, he examined them on certain profound passages in the Bible; for he was a righteous man, well versed in the scriptures. When these monks were questioned by him about these passages, each of them gave him his answer; but Barsauma, untrained in biblical scholarship as he was, elaborated a profound interpretation of the scriptures. 3 The bishop, amazed at the way Barsauma had answered him, addressed both men as follows: “Truly, my sons, you are god’s servants; for our lord himself, who knows all men,

19. 1 Cor 1:27. 20. This passage—translated literally—is probably an interpolation. 21. Barrington atlas 67, g1 (Perre). gemellinus, a contemporary and correspondent of rabbula of edessa (see the latter’s Epistula ad Gemellinum), was bishop of Perrha from 411 to 435.

The Life of Barsauma

193

revealed to me beforehand that both of you are chosen.” after this he ordained them as a deacons, saying: “You are the first ‘sons’ whom the lord has given me as a bishop.22 i ordained no one before you.” from that day onward the name of Barsauma began to be spoken of in the world.23 § 13

The fifteenth distinction. He goes out, following the flocks, to the Mountain of the Roots.

1 it was Barsauma’s custom to spend the winter in his cave. When the winter was over, he would emerge from his cave-dwelling and go to another mountain about twenty-five miles24 away from any (permanent) settlement with cultivated land. That place is extremely cold and inhospitable; moreover, the walking there was difficult. 2 from the Unleavened Bread25 until Pentecost he and his disciples would stay on that mountain in great hardship, eating grass-roots and wild salad; but they suffered more from the bitter cold and frost than from hunger. indeed, they suffered such extreme hardship that they would faint from cold and hunger and fall to the ground. § 14

The sixth sign. Bitter roots turn sweet.

1 By chance, while Barsauma’s disciples were toiling around in those difficult mountains, they came across a place where there was a little shelter from an overhanging crag. There were many roots there and, although these were bitter, it made a suitable base. 2 When the disciples found out that the roots were bitter, they began to grumble, but Barsauma said: “my sons, you know what it will take to make these bitter roots turn sweet? Just add Christ’s praise! That will sweeten them nicely!” That is exactly what happened: from that time until now those roots, so bitter before, have always been sweet. 3 some foolish people thought it was because they uprooted them year after year that the roots turned sweet; but those who were filled with the knowledge of god discerned that it was because of what Barsauma said that they were sweetened. 4 now the miracle of the bitter roots which were made sweet by the prayer of the fasting Barsauma is like that of the brackish waters which were made fresh by the prophet moses.26 § 15

The sixteenth distinction. He celebrates a regular commemoration in his monastery.

1 it was Barsauma’s custom to come down from the mountain of the roots to his cavedwelling for Pentecost and invite many people there to celebrate an excellent commemoration. They flocked to him from the cities and the villages, from the monasteries and the caves of the brethren and from distant countries. at such times Barsauma would take all the

22. lit. “in the priesthood” (syriac: b-kohnutho). 23. Barsauma is called a priest in the proceedings of ephesus ii (449) and celebrates the eucharist in §§ 49–51, 68, 69, 73, 88 (?), and 96. Zachariah became bishop of samosata (§ 103). 24. 37 km. 25. i.e., easter. 26. ex 15:23–25.

194

The Life of Barsauma

“grace” (syriac: t.aybutho) which god sent him and distribute it to the poor and to the brethren, wherever they were. § 16 The seventeenth distinction. He goes down in the summer to the mulberry-trees. 1 after doing this, Barsauma used to go down to a certain low-lying place in which there was a forest of mulberry-trees and there he would stay until the season of the ripening of the grapes. now the place where the mulberry-trees were was exceedingly hot and oppressive; nevertheless he used to stand there, unshaded, from morning until evening. § 17 The eighteenth distinction. He endures the heat of the sun and the burning of iron. 1 now Barsauma wore an iron tunic next to his skin.27 he used to keep his face and his chest turned toward the sun as it traveled across the sky, so that his body became roasted by its rays, resembling a fish that is fried in a pan. it was scorched by the heat of the iron, like the skin of a lamb when it blisters in a fiery oven.28 2 o molded clod of friable earth, the nature of which is of dust! how much hardship was he able manfully to bear without drinking water! how long he could hold out under the roasting of the sun and the heat of the iron! how heroically he used to persevere, despite his flaming thirst and the burning of the rays! 3 earth which is heated by the sun burns the grass; and mud which is exposed to the noon dries up in the heat. The flower which has nothing to drink withers from the lack of water; and the seed which has no moisture shrivels in the summer. The tree which is never irrigated becomes parched and ugly; but this rod of flesh which was planted in baptism grew greener from day to day and blossomed and flourished in the holy spirit. 4 This mystery resembled the rod of the priest aaron, which grew green without irrigation and put out shoots without water inside the ark.29 Perhaps, too, the following blessing of the prophet Jeremiah refers to him: “Blessed is the man who relies on the lord and puts his reliance in god! he will be like a tree that is planted beside a spring of water: its leaves will flourish and its branches will be shapely. in a year of drought, it shall have no fear; and its yield of fruit will not be diminished.”30 5 Barsauma, accordingly, had no fear of natural thirst, because his “roots” were planted in baptism, which does not dry up. Though lacking “irrigation,” his yield of “fruit” was undiminished, because Christ’s innocent blood pulsed joyfully in his limbs. 6 again, in not dying, although he was parched with thirst and (burned) by the sun, he resembled the three young men of Babylon, who were not burned up, although they were roasted in a furnace of fire.31

27. 28. 29. 30. 31.

Cf. eph 6:11, where, however, armor is a metaphor. Cf. Jb 30:30 (Pesh.). nm 17:16–26. Jer 17:7f. Dn 3:19–30.

The Life of Barsauma § 18

195

The seventh sign. Sour wild grapes turn sweet.

1 as soon as the grapes began to ripen, Barsauma left those mulberry-trees and went to another forest on the river euphrates, where there were wild vines, walnuts, and figs. The wild grapes were so acid that their sourness cracked the brethren’s lips and tongues. 2 When Barsauma saw the suffering of the brethren, he said to them: “let me show you what it will take to make these grapes delicious!” all of them answered: “There is no way these grapes are going to be made delicious!” But Barsauma said: “let us mix with them the sound of alleluias and the taste of prayer! That will make them delicious!” and that is exactly what happened: the sour grapes became good to eat, sweeter even than those from cultivated vines.32 3 now some of those who were with him, men who were full of discernment, observed with faith what occurred, knowing that it was of god’s doing. But others foolishly said: “Perhaps these grapes have just ripened a little more and that is why they are now good to eat.” it is a fact that the mystery of these sour grapes which were made sweet by the prayers of Barsauma is like that of the inedible mallows in the wilderness, which were made sweet through the prayer of the prophet elisha.33 § 19 The nineteenth distinction. His consumption of food. 1 This was Barsauma’s diet. so long as he dwelt in his monastery, he ate only salad and winter fruit; so long as he stayed among those mulberry-trees, he ate only mulberries; so long as he stayed in that forest of grapes, he ate only of its fruit; and so long as he was on the mountain of the Wild roots, he ate only these. if any “blessing” (syriac: burktho) was sent to him, only his disciples ate of it; he did not. § 20

The twentieth distinction. His rule of prayer.

1 This was Barsauma’s rule of prayer in the winter. in the morning he would leave his dwelling and go to a place at no small distance from the brethren. no one presumed to go anywhere near that place. There Barsauma would stand with the soles of both feet planted squarely on the ground, then bow down in prayer with his two hands clasped together behind his back from morning until evening. all day long his body was bent double, his head right down beside the soles of his feet. 2 every day from morning until evening he would subject himself to this hardship. he would begin the morning in prayer, groaning deeply and weeping astonishing tears. The tears streamed from his eyes until the soil in front of him became like malleable clay. so long as the day lasted the sound of his groaning never ceased. at sunset he would bring his prayers to an end and set a seal on his petition. at dusk he would come to his disciples. § 21

The twenty-first distinction. He speaks to his disciples every evening.

1 When his disciples were seated for their evening meal, Barsauma would enter the refectory; take up his stance in front of the brethren; place a book on the lectern; and begin

32. Cf. rom 11:16–24. 33. 2 Kgs 4:38–41.

196

The Life of Barsauma

to read and expound the words one by one, while leaning on the lectern. he read and explained the words tearfully throughout the evening meal. This he did throughout the winter, preaching long sermons to the brethren while they were eating their supper. § 22

The twenty-second distinction. His nocturnal exertions.

1 after supper Barsauma would go out to that place which had been prepared for him in the open air. § 23

The twenty-third distinction. He prays at night.

1 he would allow his disciples to rest for a short time, giving the impression of one who was himself asleep on his feet. But his disciples, who used to keep an eye on him, could see that he was actually at prayer all the time. § 24

The twenty-fourth distinction. His conduct of the night office.

1 once a fraction of the night had passed, Barsauma would resume his office, while standing in his place. With the windows of the house of his disciples open toward him, Barsauma began the service by intoning one half of the psalm-verse alone; and all his disciples would respond to him with the second half of the verse. his own voice was louder than the whole choir of his disciples. he sang the offices with them until just before dawn, when he brought the service to an end for a short time. Then his disciples rested for a full hour, while he continued in prayer until the morning. § 25 The twenty-fifth distinction. He endures snow and ice. 1 now there was much snow in that place. on many days the snow would fall on him until it covered him. The snow mounted up above his head, but he persevered, standing on his feet in the frost and the ice. 2 now the ice in that place was so destructive that it broke up even the stones and turned them to dust. if a vessel of earthenware or glass was left outside in the winter, it would gradually become cracked and shattered, so violent was the ice and so harsh the frost. 3 o “vessel of baked clay”! o miraculous “vessel”! in what “kiln” was it fired, that it did not fall to pieces, turned to dust by all this hardship?34 oh what a profound and unintelligible miracle! Vessels of hard stone and earthenware were turned to dust by the violence of the ice, whereas Barsauma’s body, “baked” in living fire and in the holy spirit, remained firm and endured by god’s power.35 he gives power to the weak36 and increases the strength of those who are afflicted with disease. To him praise and thanks are due, forever and ever, amen! § 26

The eighth sign. Demons are expelled from a man and his sons.

1 in one of the villages of that country there was a well-known man of high status who had demons. he, his sons, and his sons’ wives were all tried by evil spirits. They brought 34. Cf. Jb 10:8f.; is 64:8; Jer 18:6; Dn 2:31–35; rom 9:20f. 35. Cf. mt 3:11; lk 3:16. 36. Cf. 2 Cor 12:10.

The Life of Barsauma

197

them to Barsauma and they were healed. from that time onward god began to show great signs and astonishing feats of bravery in him. § 27

The ninth sign. A demon is expelled from a monk.

1 on another occasion they brought him a monk long inhabited by an evil spirit. The devil called out in a loud voice: “Behold, for many years i have tormented this man and no one has forced me to leave him. But now, on god’s orders, i have received this rebuke: ‘Do not presume to speak in the presence of my slave, Barsauma!’” after making this speech, the devil threw the man (onto the ground) in the middle (of the crowd) and left him alone. That instant the monk was cured. § 28

The tenth sign. Demons are expelled from a woman.

1 on another occasion they brought him a woman inhabited by many demons, which shouted out from a distance: “There are seven hundred chariot-loads of us in this woman! Do you want to make us leave her alone with a little gesture, Barsauma the roasted?” Barsauma answered: “leave god’s creature and move on!” at that very moment they left her and came out. 2 no one can tell the signs which god performed through Barsauma. They are too many to be counted. But even if i am unable to narrate them all, or even one in twenty, yet i must tell a few of that great number. § 29

The eleventh sign. The sun is held back by his prayer.

1 one day Barsauma left the road in order to climb to the cave in which he lived. in the place where, narrowing his gaze from a great distance, he could make out his dwelling-place he stopped and prayed. his disciples protested: “master, it is nearly sunset: the mountain of the Cave is too far for us to go. The walking is hard, the ascent steep and long; and we are tired. even you cannot do it. let us rather spend the night here! it is a good place and there is a supply of water.” 2 But Barsauma just turned and looked at the sun, saying to his disciples: “look, our lord will hold back the sun and tether it to stop it moving, until we enter our monastery.”37 When Barsauma had said this, he began to walk toward his cave. 3 now some of the brethren who were with him noted the position of the shadows cast by the sun from the high crags which towered over that place; and the journey of the sun across the sky was delayed. it did not continue in its course, nor did the shadows of the crags move from where they had come to a standstill, until Barsauma had arrived at his cave. 4 When he had climbed that mountain, difficult and long; and had reached his cave and entered it; and had sung a psalm and prayed according to his rule; then his disciples pointed out to each other that the shadows of the crags had remained in their positions. not one of them had moved. The sun was standing at the same height in the sky and had not progressed in its course, or moved.

37. Cf. Jo 10:13.

198

The Life of Barsauma

5 Then Barsauma turned round and spoke to the sun: “in the name of our lord, sun, resume your journey!” like a flash of lightning the sun shot down. Then Barsauma praised god and his disciples followed suit. 6 Barsauma instructed his disciples not to tell anyone about this; and they kept it to themselves and were silent.38 § 30 The twelfth sign. He sees a pillar of fire and an angel. 1 shortly afterward Barsauma’s disciples began to carve out some large winterchambers inside the cave where they lived. Because the foundations of the crag which overhung and overshadowed them were weakened, the whole crag split from the high mountain and was on the point of falling on top of the brethren where they stood beneath it, so that they ran away, yelling. The crag was subsiding by the minute and was on the point of collapse. all the brethren and even Barsauma were deeply distressed. 2 it was night and Barsauma was standing in prayer. from a distance he lifted up his eyes and saw, beneath that rocky crag, a pillar of fire which was supporting that crag and preventing it from falling. The angel of the lord was standing underneath the lower brow of the crag. his right hand was stretched out to support the crag, so that it remained standing. Then the angel spoke to Barsauma: “Come back, go in and finish your work! Do not be afraid! i have been instructed by the lord of all to support this crag and prevent it from collapsing on top of you.” 3 Barsauma kept this to himself. only when he went on a journey and fell ill did he tell his disciples what he had been told. They thought the vision was a symptom of his illness. Yet his explanation was lucid enough. after some days he came back to his cave and found the crag standing as he had left it. Then he finished hollowing out that space beneath it and made there an excellent monastery. § 31

The thirteenth sign. The water-cistern.

1 The works in Barsauma’s monastery continued. next they began to dig a great pit for a water-cistern. They dug ever deeper into the bedrock. after many days of labor, they reached a depth of thirty spans.39 it was time for the prayer of the sixth hour.40 all the brethren came up out of the hole to pray, leaving their rock-cutting and excavating tools in the pit. a small boy stayed behind to examine these instruments made of iron. 2 now there was a great boulder balanced above the brink of the hole. it had a diameter of about seventeen spans.41 That boulder suddenly teetered over and fell into the hole. it landed right on top of the boy who had been standing there. The boy was crushed between the iron tools and the boulder. his father saw it happen. he gave out a great wail, then wept, tearing out his hair and flinging it away from him. 3 everyone present felt a deep sorrow. This was not only because of the boy’s death. They were also thinking of all the effort which the brethren had put into digging the pit. 38. 39. 40. 41.

Cf. mk 1:44; 3:12; 5:43; 7:36. 6 m. noon. 340 cm.

The Life of Barsauma

199

“now that someone has met his death in this place,” they muttered, “we will never be able to collect water in it.” The brethren went to have their midday rest. after their siesta, they came back to the hole. That afternoon they considered the problem. “if only we could find a way,” they exclaimed, “to get the boy’s bones out from beneath this boulder!” The rock was too big for them to roll away, so they began to tunnel under it. 4 When they got to the middle, the tip of the boy’s foot came to light. Those who saw it wept out loud. at first they thought that the boy’s foot had been severed from his body; but when they pulled at it, it did not come out. so they went on digging around it and found the other foot. When they pulled on both feet, the boy came out, firm and alive. not a bone of his body was broken. he was not even bruised. 5 after this they continued to dig for the tools, weeping and praising god in their amazement as they did so. They found them underneath where the boy’s belly had been. Though made of iron, the tools were not just broken, they had been shattered into small fragments. everyone was astonished and wondered how it could be that hammers, mallets, crow-bars and pick-axes were shattered into small pieces by the impact of that boulder right under the boy’s belly, without hurting the boy. The general response was to praise god with loud voices. 6 so they made that pit into a water-cistern after all. But when they tried to fill it, they discovered there was a leak, (no doubt) because it was situated on the top of a mountain. They watched for a long time, but it never filled. eventually they let Barsauma down into the cistern. he prayed there, then came out again. The same day water fell from heaven and flowed into it, and it was filled—right up to the brink. § 32 Second pilgrimage to Jerusalem. 1 Barsauma now prepared mentally for a second pilgrimage to Jerusalem. This time he would take forty disciples with him. 2 at that time there was a righteous man called simeon, who stood on a stone column of six cubits’ height in the district of antioch. later he would stand on another, of twelve cubits; later still, on one of twenty-four; later still, on one of thirty-six; and, last, on one of forty.42 3 But at the time when Barsauma left his monastery for his second Jerusalem pilgrimage, simeon still stood on the column of six cubits. § 33 The fourteenth sign. Simeon’s first vision about him. 1 now on the day Barsauma left his monastery for Jerusalem, simeon had a revelation concerning Barsauma’s ascetical prowess. The angel of the lord appeared to him in the night, saying: “Why do you think that you are the most excellent of the righteous? no one on earth in this generation can compete for righteousness with Barsauma, who lives on a high mountain on the frontier with armenia. This very day, as it happens, he left his monastery on pilgrimage to Jerusalem.” now simeon had never heard of Barsauma. 2 When morning came and a large number of people were standing near him, simeon cried out with a loud voice and spoke to the multitude: “There is a righteous man, who has 42. The first column was 2.4 m high; the second 4.8; the third 9.6; the fourth 14.4; the fifth and last 16.

200

The Life of Barsauma

no equal among his contemporaries on earth. Today he left his monastery in the northern region (syriac: arʽo d-garbyo) on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. i am unworthy of seeing him, because i am a sinner. otherwise i should have asked our lord for that privilege.” § 34 The twenty-sixth distinction. He destroys pagan temples, Jewish Sabbath-houses, and Samaritan synagogues in his zeal. 1 so Barsauma set off for Jerusalem. When he reached Phoenicia, arabia, and Palestine, he began to demolish the Jewish sabbath-houses, destroy the samaritan synagogues, and burn down the pagan temples. When he had prayed in Jerusalem, he traveled on to mount sinai by the road of the wilderness.43 2 now the pagan population of that region was at that time still dominant. it was they who held the cities. They were afraid of Barsauma; each city shut her gates at his approach. The pagans armed themselves and took up their positions on the wall for battle. Barsauma turned aside and passed by some of these cities; others he overpowered and entered. 3 so when Barsauma reached reqem d-gaya,44 a great city in that country, he found its gates closed and its inhabitants standing armed on the wall. leaving his disciples standing a long way off, he approached the city alone and cried out to the men on the wall: “let me come near! let no one do me any harm! i am the least of all Christians. The others have sent me to you as a messenger to parley for peace.” The pagans answered: “if you come in peace, come near and speak!” 4 so Barsauma came up to the wall and spoke to them in a gentle voice: “You are many in number and have swords, bows, and arrows, whereas we are a mere forty souls with neither swords, nor bows, nor arrows. We have not even sticks, or slings, nor are we mounted. how can we fight with you? There are thousands and tens of thousands of you, all heavily armed.” 5 The chief priest of the idols answered: “By the life of the gods whom i serve, one of you will surely put to flight a thousand.”45 When Barsauma heard this, he was amazed and said to that priest: “Do you really know that one of us will put to flight a thousand?” The chief priest replied: “This also i know. Two of you will put to flight ten thousand.”46 Barsauma asked: “Will this come about by the power of god, or by human agency?” The chief priest answered: “By whatever means it comes about, it will be so. That i know.” 6 Then Barsauma said to the people: “Your city is built on a mountain with cliffs on every side. We merely request passage through it, because there is no way we can go round on the outside. By all means line the street with armed men to left and right, while we pass between you and go on our way in peace. We shall not even say a single word to any of you, unless you want us to do so. But if you do not let us pass through in peace, we shall make war on you and burn your city down.” When the pagans heard this, they were mightily troubled and trembled with fear in his presence. 43. 44. Petra. 45. 46.

Cf. § 36.6, where “the way of the wilderness” means the Via nova Trajana. Josephus, Ant. 4.7 (§ 161) and eusebius, Onom. 1447 (s.v. Ῥεκεμ) say rekem (Jo 18:27) is Dt 32:30a. Dt 32:30b.

The Life of Barsauma

201

7 This was what they said: “if you swear by your god that you will neither harm our city, nor burn our gods, we are willing to grant you passage.” Then Barsauma said: “if you want, we can speak to you briefly in peace; but if not, we waive even this request.” To which they replied: “You may speak for as long as you like, provided your speech is peaceful!” 8 Then the pagans opened the city gates for Barsauma and his disciples to enter. They walked in silence down the middle of the street, and the whole population of the city walked with them to right and left. When they reached the city center, Barsauma took up his stance in the middle and gestured with his hand toward the people, saying: “if you want us to address you in peace, confirm it now and we shall speak to you!” The whole population cried out: “You have permission to make a peaceful speech; only do not bring evil on our city!” 9 now the time was about the fourth hour of the day.47 Barsauma began to address them with terrible words by the wisdom of god and in the true faith. he continued teaching and demonstrating with eloquent persuasiveness from the fourth hour until the ninth.48 so powerful and terrible were the words which came out of his mouth that all the pagans were afraid. 10 They cried out: “sir, we believe that our gods made heaven and earth; but you say that the Christian god made heaven and earth and that it is he that makes it rain and feeds the world. as it happens, it is four years to the day since a drop of rain fell on our city. This city used to drink rainwater from cisterns, because it is built at such a height that no aqueduct can bring water to it. But now the cisterns and the reservoirs are empty. We have to fetch our water from a distant river, which is back-breaking toil. if your god made heaven and earth and it is he who causes the rain and the dew to fall from heaven, ask him to make it rain! if he does, we shall all become Christians!” 11 When Barsauma heard this, his face lit up. he was glad, delighted, exultant. he even laughed out loud. The reason for his confidence was that he had privileged access to his lord at all times. he said to the people of that city: “let it be as you say! Just name the hour at which you want it to rain, so that you cannot say later, ‘it was our own gods that made the rain.’” They answered: “make it rain tomorrow at the second hour.”49 12 To this, Barsauma said: “at the time you have named a great quantity of rain is going to fall on the city, filling the cisterns and the streets with water. if it does not, you have my permission to stone us to death.” 13 Then he and his disciples went into a wide courtyard surrounded by high, fortified buildings. all night long armed warriors kept watch around that courtyard, the gates of which were bolted shut. The blessed men sang psalms and were protected from the power of the pagans until the morning. 14 When day dawned, all the pagans assembled near them, from the greatest to the least, in a great crowd. The first hour was soon over.50 as yet no cloud was to be seen. The pagans began to doubt Barsauma’s promise: “look up there, Christian!” they laughed. “Perhaps your god is a liar!” 47. 48. 49. 50.

10 a.m. 3 p.m. 8 a.m. from 6 to 7 a.m.

202

The Life of Barsauma

15 They were still jeering in this way when the second hour of the day came to an end. There happened to be a clock there. at this the pagans loudly vented their blasphemous contempt. There was laughter on all sides, when someone mocked: “Christians, your god is a liar, it would seem. he has no power to make it rain for us.” § 35

The fifteenth sign. Rain falls on the pagan city.

1 suddenly, just after this shouting and commotion started, the sound of violent thunder was heard above that city. Terrible bolts of lightning flashed through the air. one celestial salvo followed another in quick succession, an awe-inspiring sound. at this, Barsauma cried out to the living god with the voice of prayer, as the prophet samuel had cried out with the voice of prayer to god in a rainstorm; and from heaven the lord, who, with the voice of thunder, had given samuel his answer, answered Barsauma now with the voice of thunder.51 2 all of a sudden clouds came up above the city, and it began to pour with rain. The courtyards, the houses, the cisterns—all were filled with water. in the streets pedestrian traffic was made impossible by the floods. from the pressure of the water mounting up inside the city the very walls were breached and collapsed. meanwhile, at any distance from the city, not a drop of rain had fallen. four days and four nights long the violent rainstorm continued. 3 Then the pagans cried out with a loud voice: “servant of the living god, hold back your rain! Do not ruin our city!” at which god’s servant said: “if you want the rain to stop before your city is ruined, deny your false guides, the idols, and confess the god of the Christians!” The pagans cried out with one voice: “We deny them! They are dead! We confess the living god.”52 4 Then Barsauma commanded: “in that case, let your priests come out into the open!” at that, the priests of the idols came and stood in the open, confessing the living god and denying the manufactured idols. only the chief priest still resisted, unwilling to deny the idols and confess god. at this the whole people cried out to Barsauma: “We all confess your god, except for this one man, who is wilfully blind to the fact that his life depends on the true god.” 5 Barsauma answered “as the lord lives, and as his living Word is true, the rain sent by heaven will not stop until this rebel confesses the god of the Christians.” Then the whole people rioted and cried out against that priest: “if you do not deny the dead idols and confess the living god, we are going to kill you and burn your house down.” even this did not make him change his mind. § 36 The sixteenth sign. The priest’s daughters appear, pursued by demons. 1 now this priest had two virgin daughters, who were being brought up in seclusion. all of a sudden, these girls appeared, screaming while they ran through the streets of the city with demons at their heels. When they got to Barsauma, they were caught up between heaven and earth by their hands and feet, as if with ropes.

51. 1 sm 12:17. 52. Cf. mt 26:26–29; mk 14:22–25; lk 22:17–19; 1 Cor 11:23–26.

The Life of Barsauma

203

2 The demons now railed at Barsauma: “What business have you with us, Barsauma, servant of the most high god?53 have you come here to demolish our temples and to abolish our religion? ever since this city was built, it has belonged to us. Until now, we received the sacrifices and libations of its inhabitants.” 3 When the chief priest heard this, he fell on his face at Barsauma’s feet, shaken to the core. Taking handfuls of dust, he scattered it on his own head, then beat his face against the earth, crying out in a loud voice: “have mercy on me, servant of the living god!” and the whole people, from the greatest down to the least, cried: “mercy, angel of light and messenger of peace!” They were trembling with fear. 4 Then Barsauma answered the chief priest and his colleagues: “You must take up hammers and mallets to overthrow and demolish your own false guides, the idols. otherwise you might say in a few days’ time: ‘it was not we that overthrew our gods.’” at his word, the priests all took up hammers and mallets of iron to overthrow the idols and shattered them with their own hands. 5 next, Barsauma gave the devils their marching orders: “in the name of our lord Jesus Christ i command you to let these girls be and never to enter this city again.” at this the devils let go of the virgins and left the city for good; heaven withheld its rain and the clouds dispersed; and all the inhabitants of that city became Christians. 6 Then Barsauma left that city in peace. in every place he came to he worked wonders; and at his coming every country trembled with fear. 7 so he went to sinai, climbed the mountain, prayed there, came down again, and returned on foot by the road of the wilderness.54 § 37 The seventeenth sign. A jar which fills up with wine. 1 The Christian administrator (ἐπίτροπος) of a town which he was passing came out in great fear to meet Barsauma and his forty disciples and covered their feet with kisses, from the greatest down to the least. it was midday, so the administrator led them to a shady place, then hurried off to his house to bring them a loaf of bread and a jar of wine. 2 Barsauma took the bread and blessed it, then broke it and gave it to his disciples. When he had blessed the jar, which contained eleven pints of wine, he picked it up and put it to the lips of his disciples, urging each to drink his fill. 3 ”You are all worn out,” he said to the brethren. “You are shattered—exhausted by your journey through the wilderness. now, therefore, drink of this blessing as if your lives depended on it! Drink as much as you can, then drink some more!” With his own hands he mixed it with water and poured it into their mouths; and they all drank as much as they could, leaving only the dregs. Then everyone took a siesta. 4 While they slept, Barsauma prayed. after praying, he found the jar filled to the brim with wine, so he roused his disciples. They were delighted and praised god for the miracle they had seen. from then until the evening Barsauma was mixing and pouring from that jar. everyone who happened to pass by drank with them; and, for the blessing’s sake, each drank more than he wanted. 53. Cf. heb 3:5. 54. The Via nova Trajana.

204

The Life of Barsauma

5 When it was time for evening prayers, the blessed men performed the office there. By the end of the office, new wine had filled the far. all that evening they continued to drink their fill; and the next morning, when they set out on the road, they left it full of wine.55 § 38

The Jewish synagogue.

1 Barsauma journeyed on through those southern regions, working wonder after wonder, until he reached rabbat moab.56 now there was in that city a Jewish synagogue unequaled by any ever built, with the sole exception of the temple which King solomon built in Jerusalem.57 2 This synagogue was built of great hewn stones, and its walls and floor were clad in bronze; it was richly decorated with gold and silver, and in all its doorways hung little golden bells; an outer wall of siege-proof stone with great gates of iron surrounded it, and strong doors of bronze closed the house of prayer (syriac: hayklo) within. 3 When Barsauma approached that city, a host of armed Jews, fifteen thousand strong, came out to meet him in battle. § 39

The eighteenth sign. Barsauma alone routs fifteen thousand Jews who offer him battle.

1 Barsauma armed his mind against this host and by the spirit of god he routed them and they fled before him. When he made as if to invade the siege-proof wall which surrounded their synagogue, they bolted the iron gates and took up their positions, armed for battle, on the wall above. Barsauma went straight for the iron gate. The Jews rained arrows and stones on them, but none struck even the cloaks of his disciples. § 40

The nineteenth sign. The stone which the Jews threw from the wall.

1 Barsauma and his disciples stopped in front of the gate in the outer wall. While they were standing still, the Jews brought up a great hewn stone and hurled it down on top of them. With a loud crack the stone fell on one of the brethren’s head; but it was the stone which was broken, not that brother’s head. it cracked into four pieces, which fell harmlessly to the ground. The brother did not even feel the blow. When the Jews saw this, they wailed and fled in all directions. § 41

The twentieth sign.

1 Then, by the will of god, the iron gates flew open. lifting up his eyes, Barsauma saw the rich decoration of the temple.

55. Cf. ex 16:12; 2 Kgs 4:1–7; Jer 13:12. 56. rabbat moab is areopolis, ca. 110 km north of Petra on the Via nova Trajana: Barrington atlas 71, B3. 57. 1 Kgs 6.

The Life of Barsauma

205

§ 42 The twenty-seventh distinction. He allows no one to take anything from the burning synagogue. 1 Barsauma said to his companions: “The curse of the living god on anyone who takes any object, however small, from this synagogue! let this temple and all that is in it be fed to the fire!” now there was inside the temple a golden ark, a golden table, a ceremonial candlestick, golden torches,58 and golden lamps hanging on chains. There was also an abundance of gold cladding on the doors, on the walls, and on the columns, not to mention the precious garments made of fine linen, silk, and embroidered linen, the silver, the bronze, and the precious stones. 2 Barsauma’s disciples had brought with them naphtha and sulfur. These they made into a number of balls which they hurled at the walls and at the ceiling of the building. all of a sudden fire took hold of the whole interior of the building. it consumed the wooden beams, the stones, the bronze, the iron, the gold, the silver, the valuable garments, the precious stones, and everything which was to be found there. The fire worked its way down to the foundations and utterly destroyed the naos. 3 now a stranger had attached himself to the blessed men while they were entering that place, disguised in the dress (σχῆμα) of a Christian. While the blessed men were getting ready to throw fire onto the temple, that man stole away on his own. he drew a sword from his belt and laid it to the lower hems of the great curtains which were hung there, with little golden bells attached to them. he cut off a considerable number of little bells and put them in the haircloth shoulder-bag which he was carrying. 4 one of Barsauma’s disciples saw this thief and said nothing; but when Barsauma came out and walked away from there, that disciple went and told Barsauma what he had seen. Then Barsauma summoned the thief to a place where everyone could see him, saying: “Put your shoulder-bag on the ground and open it!” Trembling and shaking, the thief did as he was told. 5 When he saw the gold in the thief ’s shoulder-bag Barsauma said to him: “achor the thief treated the curse with contempt.59 Your crime is just like his! The walls of Jericho were clad in bronze; and so were the walls of this synagogue. achor the thief treated the curse with contempt and stole a golden bell;60 and you, like a member of his gang, stole some little golden bells. 6 “Take this darkness, then, which you have loved more than your life, and go and receive your inheritance along with achor, your fellow gangster!” With this, Barsauma drove out the thief from his company. § 43 The twenty-first sign. The gold taken by the thief is lost. 1 having put a little distance between himself and Barsauma, the thief placed his shoulder-bag on the ground and stood there, remonstrating with his loot: “gold, you murderer and deceiver!” he cried. “What wrong have i done to you that you have separated me

58. Cf. ex 25:10–16 (ark), 23–28 (table), 31–36 (candlestick), and 37f. (torches). 59. Jo 7. 60. one of the objects stolen by achan (syriac: Okhor, or akhor) was a “tongue” (Jo 7:21; syriac: lešono) of gold weighing about seven ounces. This is usually interpreted as a wedge, but an object might be called a “tongue” by virtue of its ability to speak, hence “bell.”

206

The Life of Barsauma

from the monastery of the angels? You have hanged yourself around my neck like the noose around iscariot’s windpipe.”61 2 While that man was standing and weeping for his soul, the shoulder-bag was swallowed up in front of his very eyes and was nowhere to be found. Then that man turned back and fell at the feet of Barsauma, weeping, and told him what had happened. When Barsauma had satisfied himself that the gold was gone, he released that man from the curse; but still he drove him out from his company. § 44 The twenty-second sign. Fire, produced by a stone, consumes a house of idols. 1 now one of the disciples from Barsauma’s company went off on his own to the Valley of arnon,62 where a large house of idols stood, dating from primordial times. it must have been built by the mighty ones after the flood,63 because stones of an amazing size had been incorporated in the building. While that monk was a long way away from the house of idols, he took off the habit (σχῆμα) he wore as a mourner and put on the clothing of a beggar. 2 When he reached the house of idols, a great crowd was assembled there. he went in and looked all around the house of idols. Then he sat down among the beggars who were seated in the western courtyard of the naos of the house of idols. from the second hour until the ninth64 he was with those beggars with his head between his knees, weeping great tears. 3 at the ninth hour, he got to his feet, prostrated himself on the ground, and wept bitter tears with much emotion. Then he picked up a small stone from the ground and wept over it, until it was moistened with his tears. Then took spittle from his mouth on his finger and made the sign of the cross on that stone. 4 next, so as not to let the pagans know what he intended, he looked up at some birds that were flying beside the naos of the idols and acted as though he meant to throw the stone at those birds. he threw the stone across the path of the birds’ flight; but the stone went past them and struck the wall of the naos of the idols and started a fire there. 5 a flame flared up like a pillar of cloud and covered the house of idols. The roaring blaze devoured the ashlar walls. in the path of that conflagration the hewn stones were like dry stubble at the time of the harvest. With the stones the fire engulfed the wooden beams and the statues of the idols, utterly destroying both the idols and their house, right down to its foundations. 6 not one stone, however small, escaped that furnace. all were turned into a fine ash; and a great wind began to blow and scatter the ashes from the burned naos, as the chaff flies away from grain which is winnowed in a breeze. Just so, the ashes were swept off in the direction of the wilderness.

61. 62. 63. 64.

Cf. mt 27:5. Barrington atlas 71, B3; cf. nm 21f.; Dt 2–4; Jo 12f.; Jgs 11; Jer 48:20. Cf. gn 10. from 7 a.m. until 3 p.m.

The Life of Barsauma

207

§ 45 The twenty-eighth distinction. Destruction of pagan temples and Jewish synagogues. 1 as for Barsauma, he journeyed on toward the eastern region, destroying pagan temples and burning down Jewish synagogues. § 46 The twenty-third sign. Simeon’s second vision about him. 1 at this time simeon addressed a great crowd as follows: “some time ago i told you about a righteous man who was about to make a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. Well, he has been there and performed great deeds; and now he is safely back, and god, heeding my sinful voice, has put it into his mind to visit my insignificant person and pray for me.” § 47

The twenty-fourth sign. Simeon’s third vision about him.

1 soon afterward Barsauma arrived in the district of apamea. Then simeon addressed the crowds who were standing around him as follows: “anyone who wants to receive a blessing from that righteous man whom i am expecting should stay for three days. in three days’ time god’s servant will be here.” 2 on the morning of the third day simeon cried out in a loud voice: “anyone who wishes to obtain a blessing from god’s chosen one should stay here until the third hour, because at that hour the one chosen by god will enter this place.” 3 sure enough, during the third hour,65 Barsauma came, making straight for simeon’s enclosure. When Barsauma was about to enter the enclosure through the gate, the righteous simeon stretched out his two arms to welcome him. 4 Then simeon lifted up his voice and cried out: “Welcome, servant of the living god! Blessed was your departure and blessed is your return! Praise to Christ who heeded my sinful voice and deemed me worthy to see your face!” 5 Then he embraced Barsauma, kissing him on his head and on his eyes. simeon was not just glad; he was overjoyed and praised god. he persuaded Barsauma to stay for a few days; then the two men asked each other for a blessing, and Barsauma set off for his monastery. § 48

The twenty-fifth sign. The larder in his monastery overflows.

1 Barsauma was back in his monastery. it was the winter of the same year. one day his disciples entered the larder which they had made and found a superabundance of all the supplies they had in storage. The wine and the olive oil; the lentils and the chickpeas; everything just welled up and overflowed. for eighteen years some residue of that day’s blessing lingered in his monastery; only then was it finally exhausted. § 49 The twenty-sixth sign. A source of water is rendered healthy. 1 The following summer Barsauma happened to be passing through a village with an abundant source of flowing water, which irrigated not only its vineyards and its gardens, but also its plowed fields. 65. Between 8 and 9 a.m.

208

The Life of Barsauma

2 however, the villagers were unhappy. “Yes, my lord,” they told him, “we have plenty of water; but it is bad. The produce of our lands is diseased and the people in our village die in agony of illnesses. We beg Your holiness to come and pray over our source!” 3 Barsauma made a shelter above the source of the water, then burned incense and offered up the eucharist there. he dipped his fingers into the communion chalice and sprinkled some of its contents in the source. at once the water was churned up, and the source grew troubled. an enormous black snake came swimming up out of it before their eyes. it was the poison given off by this snake while it lived there that made the water of that source unhealthy. 4 at that sight, the others all ran away, wailing, but Barsauma ran after it, took hold of its tail, swung it up far above his own height and brought it crashing down onto the ground. The snake burst apart, from its head right down to its tail, at which everyone praised god. from then until now the water has been healthy, like the pestilential water which was made healthy by the prophet elisha.66 § 50

The twenty-seventh sign. The infertile vineyard.

1 Barsauma went on his way and entered another village, where the villagers approached him with the following complaint: “my lord, we have an extensive vineyard which we take a great deal of trouble to cultivate—year in, year out. Yet it never produces anything for us to eat. The little fruit that it produces is rotten and crawling with worms.” 2 Barsauma prayed in the vineyard and offered the eucharist there, then gave these instructions: “Be sure to give tithes from the produce of this vineyard to the churches and the poor!” To which the villagers readily agreed. That year their vineyard yielded plenty of fruit; indeed, they could not find enough baskets for the harvest. 3 for three years the harvest was good. But then one of the villagers, a shameless man, began to grumble: ‘”Why do i give all this wine away and make a loss? let what i have given up to now be sufficient!” others heard what he said and echoed his words. 4 it was nearly time for the harvest. The vineyard was weighed down with a great abundance of grapes; and the clusters were of a wonderful size. But all at once, when the day dawned for picking them, the grapes turned rotten; they began to crawl with worms and dropped to the ground. 5 When the people of that village saw what had happened, they trembled with fear. They came to visit Barsauma and pleaded with him. after that the vineyard produced fruit again, but it was not the same as at first. § 51

Many signs.

1 after this the people of other districts began to take Barsauma to their villages. Wherever there was a vineyard which yielded no fruit, he would pray in it and offer up the oblation there; and it would bear fruit in plenty. in many villages he did the same. many trees, too, which had been barren before, began to yield fine produce.

66. 2 Kgs 2:19–22.

The Life of Barsauma § 52

209

The twenty-eighth sign. A vineyard, cursed by him, yields no fruit.

1 one day Barsauma climbed a desolate mountain to visit a certain mourner. now this mourner had planted a few grapevines on that mountain. he showed Barsauma the place. “give a blessing, sir,” he requested, “to my ‘novice’ (syriac: sharwoyo)—the vineyard i have planted here!” 2 Barsauma was displeased because that mourner’s mind was preoccupied with plants. “Praise the lord,” he replied, “who is going to see to it that no one ever eats the fruit of this vineyard!” and that is what came to pass. The mourner has tended those grapevines, pruning, tilling, and propping up their branches, year by year, right up to the present day. But they have not produced a single grape. § 53 The twenty-ninth sign. A newly planted vineyard, cursed by him, dries up. 1 Barsauma was back in his cave now. his disciples had an idea: “Come! let us make ourselves vegetable plots and plant a few grapevines there! Then we will have places of refreshment, where we can enjoy ourselves!” so they sent brethren to fetch stocks with which to plant a vineyard. 2 When Barsauma came in from saying his private prayers at the time of the evening office, all his disciples came out to meet him, as happened every day. They prostrated themselves at his feet and venerated him, as was their custom. Then, speaking all at once, they said: “Pronounce a blessing, my lord, over the new vineyard we have planted!” 3 “Bless god’s Word,” said Barsauma, “which is going to see to it that not one of the grapevines you have planted sprouts! our ‘vineyard’ is Christ, who said: ‘i am the vineyard and you are the branches.’67 We are the ‘plants’ and we will bear tasty ‘fruit’ through the Crucified, as he promised.”68 The moment Barsauma said this, the shoots of those grapevines dried up and not one of them showed above the ground. § 54

The thirtieth sign.

1 a good many miles away from his monastery there was a village with poor lands, which produced nothing but weeds and thorns and brambles. The little corn that grew there was deprived of moisture by the surrounding brambles and shriveled up. 2 a certain young man from that village went out into the fields on his own. he selected a smooth stone and sat down and wrote on it, “i, Barsauma, head of the mourners, have left these written instructions. if the owners of this land wish to eat of its produce, let them perform a rogation here, then fast and pray for seven days and finish by holding a commemoration of the martyrs at which the oblation is offered. Then our lord will show mercy and the land will produce enough for all to eat and praise god for it.” 3 afterward his fellow villagers found his inscription on the stone. Believing it was Barsauma that had penned it, they obeyed the written instructions. That year the land produced a bumper harvest; and still the blessing rests on it today.

67. Cf. Jn 15:1–6. 68. Cf. Jn 15:16.

210

The Life of Barsauma

4 soon villagers from the surrounding countries began to invite Barsauma to bless their infertile lands and render these productive. many fatal diseases, affecting people and their animals, were brought to an end by his prayers as well. suffering people were healed by him in great numbers, and all their ordeals and handicaps were brought to an end by the intercession of the champion (ἀθλητής). 5 To all men he brought all kinds of benefit. Those who loved the earthly would be blessed by his prayers; those who sought the heavenly would find it in his true teaching. Whoever was tempted by satan would receive help in his ordeal; whoever was being punished by god would get relief from his punishment. 6 like a siege-proof wall Barsauma stood there, defending the people from god’s anger. like a shield which absorbs the shock of arrows, he protected them from harm. § 55 The thirty-first sign. A snakes infests a monastery. 1 There was a fine monastery in a certain district, where an enormous snake had made its abode. The evil, destructive beast had invaded it, screeching and hissing, and driven out all its inmates. for a long time after this the monastery was deserted. 2 When Barsauma was told what had happened by people from that country, he decided to go there. While he was still a good way off, the snake which haunted the monastery sensed his approach. it sallied out in a rearing rage to meet him, screeching as it came. 3 Barsauma confronted it: “Why so arrogant, cursed enemy of adam?” With that he took hold of the snake by the middle, whipped it in the air, and flung it down on the ground, where it burst apart from head to tail. § 56

The thirty-second sign. He breathes on a viper and leaves it dry.

1 another time Barsauma was praying, bent double, in a place where deep crevices gaped between the rocks, when a huge scary viper emerged from a hole and stopped at his heels, raging and blowing. The snake filled its maw with poison and spat on his face. 2 Was Barsauma frightened?69 Did he stand up straight when he saw it? no, he fixed it with his eye between his ankles and just blew at it. instantaneously the snake went stiff and dry, like a stick. his disciples went to the place and saw that shriveled viper, cast down on the ground. § 57 Many signs. 1 after that everyone who was bitten by a snake came to Barsauma for healing and everyone who was bitten by a rabid dog and came to see him got better. he purged human beings of all scourges and freed them from all trials. in every region he exorcized demons; no one knows the number that were driven out. § 58 The thirty-third sign. Demons take control of some women who are fooling around. 1 There were some women who came out of a certain village into the fields to fool around and have fun. one dressed up as Barsauma and struck a pose, while the others acted the part of she-devils, screaming for fear of “Barsauma,” in mockery of the holy man. 69. Cf. acts 28:1–6.

The Life of Barsauma

211

2 all at once demons took control of them. They began to wail and go about with their hands locked together, tearing at their bodies with their teeth. They were still being punished in this way when they came and stood in front of the real Barsauma. 3 Through their mouths the demons cried: “We received an order from heaven to torment these women for fooling around and making fun of you.” They went on tormenting the women for a long time. § 59 The thirty-fourth sign. A devil is exorcized by a wafer of bread. 1 another time Barsauma was crossing a high mountain when a man appeared, running after him. When he caught up with him, he panted: “sir, have mercy! There is someone in my house who is at Death’s door. When i left him to run after you, they had given him up for dead.” 2 Barsauma took a wafer (syriac: qeluro) of bread, made the sign of the cross over it and gave it to that man, saying: “Take this ‘blessing’ (syriac: burktho) and hurry back home! Place it on that man’s tongue, whether he is dead or alive!” 3 running back home, the man found the patient breathing his last. his nurses had already closed his eyes. But when the “blessing” was placed on his tongue, he took two or three deep breaths and opened mouth and eyes. Then he sat up straight, recovered his vitality, and praised god. 4 Driven out, the devil which had suffocated that man overtook Barsauma on the mountain like a flying shadow. Blowing like a gale, it swept the legs out from under him. for a moment it seemed he was going to fall on his face. Then he stretched out his hands to break his fall—and laughed. 5 standing in front of him, the devil whined: “Do you begrudge me even the paltry success of knocking you down? i am the devil which was strangling a man in that village over there. You sent a wafer of bread to drive me out.” § 60 The thirty-fifth sign. A man is exorcized in Melitene. 1 The bishop of melitene in Cappadocia was a certain acacius,70 a man both famous and wise. about Barsauma, however, he knew only by hearsay. now he wrote persuasively to Barsauma at his monastery. 2 The gist of his letter was this: “i beg Your grace to make the effort to come and bless our city. We are longing to see you.” This request was the nub of the bishop’s letter, though he covered several pages in saying it. it was enough to move Barsauma to leave syria and go to Cappadocia. 3 now when Bishop acacius heard that Barsauma was coming, he made the following suggestion to his clergy (κληρικοί) and his close associates: “i think we should test this syrian mourner and find out whether what we have heard about him is true.” 4 now there was a man there who had been possessed by a mute spirit for a long time. every day he visited the bones of the martyrs and anointed himself continuously with the

70. Barrington atlas 1, K3. acacius (akakios, aqaq) was bishop of melitene from before the first Council of ephesus (431), in which he participated, until his death (after 438 and before 449).

212

The Life of Barsauma

oil of prayer. But the devil remained stubbornly mute. he only tormented the man the more for all his efforts, so that they had to put him in chains. But no iron was strong enough to restrain him. he always freed himself. 5 secretly, as instructed by their bishop, they brought out this man to test Barsauma. The moment they opened the door of the room where he was, the devil in that man caught sight of the ascetic (ἀθλητής) and screamed: “it is you, Barsauma, the warrior! You will not take long to drive me out.” Then, locking his hands together, the man threw himself at his feet. 6 “in the name of Christ,” said Barsauma, “leave this body, never to return!” immediately the devil came out of that man, and he was healed. The bishop and his whole city were overjoyed; and god performed further signs there through his agent. § 62

The thirty-sixth sign. A city administrator, cursed by him, promptly dies.71

1 Barsauma was journeying toward a certain city when some people came from another town denouncing a certain rich man who was behaving badly toward them. They had paid him back what they owed, but he had not given them a written cancellation of their debt. afterward he had demanded repayment of the debt a second and a third time. 2 Barsauma sent a deacon to summon him. When that deacon presented himself at the man’s door, his slaves went in and told him. But the man told them to go back and find out the reason for the visit, so they did this. 3 now the man did not want to do what was right, so he tried to deceive the deacon. he took to his bed, covered with blankets. When the deacon came in, he saw him there, groaning and shivering as though with a fever. he told the deacon to go and tell his master to pray for him because he was ill with a fever; and the deacon reported this back to Barsauma. 4 one of his disciples saw through the trick: “master, you can be sure that this wicked pillager is lying! he is not really ill. he is just using illness as an excuse so as not to have to come and face you here, where you can plead with him on behalf of those poor people whom he is oppressing.” 5 To this, Barsauma said: “if he is really ill and not feigning illness, may Christ restore him to good health! But if he has deceived us, may they take him from the bed on which he is lying to the grave!”72 6 With this, Barsauma left; but people from that city came after him. “The man who refused to come out, when you sent word to his house,” they said, “is being borne, as we speak, in solemn procession to the grave.” § 61

The thirty-seventh sign. A city administrator, cursed by him, promptly dies.73

1 one day, Barsauma was approaching a certain city when some poor people came and complained to him about their administrator (ἐπίτροπος), who was using force to oppress them for private gain. Barsauma sent two of his disciples to that man’s house to summon 71. This should follow § 61, as in all the other manuscripts. The scribe of the Damascus manuscript accidentally skipped that chapter and copied the next one, then noticed his mistake and copied out what he had omitted. 72. Cf. acts 5:9. 73. This chapter belongs before § 62.

The Life of Barsauma

213

him to their master, in order that the case of those poor people might be heard, but he refused to come out to him. 2 The disciples reported back to Barsauma, who duly passed sentence on him; “i asked that tyrant to come out here so that i might plead with him for his own good, but he refuses. god will soon take his soul from his body for this. he will not live much longer to oppress the poor.” Word reached him on the next stage of his journey that the administrator had died from a sudden fall. § 63 The thirty-eighth sign. A rich man, cursed by him, dies. 1 going on again, Barsauma reached another great city. There was a rich man there, who was the mayor of that city (syriac: rishoh da-mdhito). This man was a friend of the emperor. The bishops and judges were all biased in deference to him, and he used this power to lord it over everyone. now this man was committing a great crime in that district. 2 Barsauma sent word to him, and this man did come out to meet him. Barsauma used persuasion, pleading with him to restrain his criminal practices, but he declined to do so. 3 Then Barsauma took a different tone: “By the life of the lord in whose presence i stand, willing or unwilling, you will do as i say!” 4 at this the mayor was extremely angry. he snapped back at Barsauma: “rest assured that every word which i have heard from your mouth will come to the ears of the general (στρατηλάτης)74 and the imperial couple (lit. “the emperors”)!” 5 “Will you be going in person to slander me,” asked Barsauma, “or are you going to send a messenger?” “i shall go in person by swift horses”75 was the answer. 6 To this, Barsauma replied: “it is my hope in Christ, whom i serve, that you shall not see your patrons’ face, because you have cut off your hope from the true god and have hung it on a spider’s web.” 7 hurling angry threats, that man left him. shortly afterward, driving fast along the road in order to accuse Barsauma at the courts of the general and of the imperial couple, he had a fatal accident. This alarmed everybody; but many could be heard praising god for it. § 64

The thirty-ninth sign. A barren woman, after he has prayed for her, gives birth.

1 Barsauma now traveled south. as he passed by a certain opulent town, a great crowd came out to greet him. he had dismissed the crowds and was well on his way again when a woman from the town came into sight. she was running after him and weeping as she ran. at last she threw herself on the ground at his feet, groveling abjectly. 2 “What is the matter with you, woman?” Barsauma asked her. “Why are you weeping so?” she answered: “i beg you! may the god whom you serve move you to take pity on me!

74. The magister militum per Orientem (στρατηλάτης τῆς ἕω), whose residence was at antioch (§ 109.1), the harbor of which city was the point of embarkation for the voyage to the court of “the emperors” (syriac: malkē; i.e., the emperor and his wife) in Constantinople (cf. § 63.7). 75. Cf. hb 1:8.

214

The Life of Barsauma

i have a pain in my heart. That is why i have made bold to run after you. i am the wife of a man from this town. i have no son in the world, and my husband and his parents hate me for it. every day they curse me, hurl insults at me, beat me. i do not know what to do. Your servant’s soul is bitter, afflicted by these trials. Where can i find a refuge from my husband and my parents-in-law? i do not know where to go!” 3 looking up to heaven, Barsauma said: “Do not afflict yourself with worry!76 Do not cry! it is eternal life you should be worried about. have a care for that! in the meantime, god in his mercy will console you with a child. The hurtful things your husband and his parents say to you now will soon be a thing of the past.” Then the woman left and went back to her house in peace. 4 Ten months later she and her husband and his parents wrote to Barsauma in the northern region: “Just as you promised, sir, we rejoice, as we write, in a birth. The child that has been born is a girl. We have called her Bathsauma77 after you; so pray, sir, for fasting’s Daughter and her parents [sic]!” § 65 Many signs. 1 after this many childless couples applied to Barsauma to make them fertile, and god gave them offspring. § 66 The fortieth sign. An Isaurian causes an outbreak of the plague. 1 about that time a barbarian of the race of the isaurians, an uncouth man, was passing through a certain village when he saw a consecrated woman (syriac: bath qyomo). he took her home with him to be his wife and made exchange her habit for that of a laywoman. 2 hearing this scandal, Barsauma sent eight of his disciples to abduct the woman, intending to have her reconsecrated.78 The brethren had successfully abducted her and were already on their way home when the villagers came out after them with sticks and stones and took the woman back by force. They did this to please the isaurian, because they were afraid of him. The disciples then reported the failure of their mission to Barsauma, who responded to the news with the following words. 3 “By the Crucified (syriac: s.livo), whom i worship, i hope he will send the grim reapers79 to that village very soon.” 4 straight after that a virulent plague fell on the village. The elders came, hanging their heads and weeping, and prostrated themselves at the feet of god’s servant,80 begging him to forgive their crime. Barsauma accepted their apology and went to pray in that village. The plague ceased to spread immediately after he had prayed there, and there were no more fatalities there at that time.

76. Cf. mt 6:25–34. 77. meaning “daughter of fasting,” the feminine form of the name Barsauma. 78. lit. “so that they might lead away that woman and she might return to her covenant (syriac: qyomoh).” 79. lit. “the reapers of wrath,” i.e., the angels who are the agents of god’s just anger; cf. mt 13:30, 39. 80. Cf. heb 3:5.

The Life of Barsauma

215

5 When the barbarian saw what had occurred, he was badly shaken. he took the woman whom he had made his wife, prostrated himself at Barsauma’s feet, and said: “have mercy on me, sir! forgive my crime! here is the woman! send her to a convent to serve god as a nun!” § 67

The forty-first sign. A woman dies, teeming with maggots, because of his curse.

1 Then Barsauma spoke to the woman: “Take my advice! go to a convent and serve god as a nun! if this man comes to take you out of there, the angel of the lord will strike him down on the road. his flesh will teem with maggots and he will die. if you leave the convent and try to go back to him, you will receive the same punishment and die.” 2 The woman did go to a convent and stayed there a little time. But then satan entered her heart and made her leave that place. she was on her way back to that man when the angel of the lord struck her down. her flesh teemed with maggots, and she died. This event inspired fear and trembling in that whole region. § 68

The forty-second sign. A disease is prevented from spreading by his prayers.

1 about the same time a contagious disease fell on a defensible town on the bank of a certain river in the northern region. The inhabitants came and begged Barsauma to come with them to their town. By praying and offering up the oblation he prevented the disease from spreading further. all those who had contracted the illness survived. Then he received delegations from the whole district (syriac: athro), for all thanked god, who acts at the request of those who fear him.81 § 69 The forty-third sign. A pestilence is stopped by his prayers. 1 not long afterward a virulent pestilence fell on a certain fortified town82 situated in the high mountains of the north.83 in no time at all three hundred and seventy souls were dead. The elders and the priests came and fell down at the feet of Barsauma and presented this petition: ‘have mercy on us, sir! Pity our people! Unless your prayers come quickly to its aid, our town will be totally depopulated and reduced to a ruin by this pestilence.” 2 When Barsauma arrived with them at their town, men, women, and children came out to meet him. The women lifted up their voices and lamented. every mouth emitted a groan, and from every eye fell tears of bitter sadness. Barsauma, too, was deeply grieved and his tears flowed freely. raising his voice above their lamentations, he said to the women: “may our lord have mercy on you and on your children!” 3 he entered the martyrium (syriac: beth sohde) and offered up the oblation there with prayers and the burning of incense; immediately the pestilence ceased to spread. all who

81. lit. “who does the will of his fearers.” 82. Jer 1:18. 83. This village was in the district of Claudias, and the plague was stopped there in the month of april; cf. § 70.

216

The Life of Barsauma

were then suffering from it were cured and survived. a great number of people recovered who had been at Death’s door. § 70 The inhabitants of the district of Claudias petition him about an epidemic which breaks out there. 1 in the winter of that year there was a spell of bitter cold, with ice and snow. such a winter had not occurred for many years. That year would be remembered as “the year of the harsh winter.” as if the harsh winter were not a sufficiently violent punishment, a virulent disease fell on all alike in the district of Claudias (syriac: athro d-beth qlawdiyoye),84 except for that first town, where the pestilence had been halted in the month of april. 2 The priests and the elders of that district all came together to petition him in his monastery. They made the following address to him: “sir, take pity on our whole district, before it becomes so depopulated that it cannot recover! as you see, the epidemic has struck the whole district with equal force. Pitilessly, it is wiping out the people. in many a house where it begins in the morning, all are dead by the same evening. in others it begins in the evening, and by the morning they are empty.” 3 in response Barsauma said this: “This is a harsh winter, as you know. many have died of the bitter cold, as you have seen. many others have frostbitten feet from the snow and ice. now my brethren refuse to wear shoes. if, barefoot in these extreme conditions, they go with me, they will die. i would come with you on my own, but that is not going to happen. so go and hold vigils and offer up the oblations! Perhaps god will hear your voice and put a stop to the pestilence.” 4 They went and did as he said, but the pestilence did not come to an end. so they came again. This time the priests and elders brought many little children with them. They stopped a little way from Barsauma’s cave and scattered ashes over the children, who made their entrance first, like a flock of innocent lambs, followed by all the priests and elders of Claudias. They did this so that Barsauma might see the children covered with a sprinkling of ashes and feel sorry for them. 5 at that moment, Barsauma was conversing with one of his disciples, who had been bedridden for a long time with an illness. When this disciple, whose opinion counted for much with Barsauma, saw all those children covered with ashes, he was very sorry for them. he wept and the tears streamed down his cheeks. 6 Then that disciple addressed the following speech to Barsauma: “sir, our scriptures urge us to ‘rejoice with those who rejoice and weep with those who weep!’85 When these people were rejoicing, we rejoiced with them. now that the time has come for them to weep instead, we should surely be weeping with them!” 7 Barsauma was deeply distressed. “You have hurried to the door,” he answered, “so as to be the first to open it. for that reason you will not lag behind me. of that you can be sure.” his disciple protested: “sir, you must be able to see that i cannot go with you in these extreme conditions. i am confined to my bed.” 84. The district of Claudias, on the right bank of the euphrates gorge, south of the diocese of melitene in armenia ii, belonged to the diocese of samosata in the province of augusta euphratensis. 85. rom 12:15.

The Life of Barsauma

217

8 “Do you really believe,” asked Barsauma, “that god will hear me, if i go and pray in his presence in the country where the epidemic has struck? Will he really stop the disease from spreading further?” “sir,” said the disciple, “if i did not know that our lord does everything that you ask of him, i would not have urged you to go.” 9 Barsauma pursued his line of reasoning: “so you believe that i, in Christ’s name, am going to bring back from Death’s door a vast number of people, which is a greater thing by far than healing one person who is neither dying, nor even close to it. are you not certain, then, that you will get well immediately, if i ask it of our lord?” “of this, too,” admitted his disciple, “i am convinced.” 10 accordingly, Barsauma gave him this command: “stand up in the name of Christ and be freed of your disease!” immediately the disciple was healed and stood up, like one who had never been ill, whereupon Barsauma sang out: “By god, in whose presence i stand, it is my hope that you will see his redemption clearly with the outer eyes of your body.” § 71 The forty-fourth sign. An epidemic is halted throughout the district of Claudias when he goes and prays there. 1 so Barsauma left his monastery to go to that district. The first town he came to was the capital of Claudias. accompanied by his disciples, he went into the church of that town. Then the townspeople brought in many people suffering from the disease and laid them on the floor in front of him. 2 at that time there were more than three hundred and sixty people in that place, all of them in dire straits and at their last breath. Then Barsauma formed two choirs of his disciples and intoned the first psalm of the evening office. § 72

The forty-fifth sign. Death, who is Satan, appears with his hands locked together behind his back, worshipping Barsauma.

1 it was night. Barsauma was standing in front of the choirs, while his disciples sang the psalms. “You will see god’s redemption distinctly with your eyes,” Barsauma had told his disciple, back there in his monastery; and that prediction was about to be fulfilled. all of a sudden, he had an amazing vision. That disciple lifted up his eyes and saw quite distinctly, from where he stood, the one who, as Paul says, “holds the power of death.”86 2 There was no doubt about it. it was satan. he had his hands locked together behind his back. flames of fire issued from his mouth, eyes, and nostrils. his mouth was open, and his tongue was hanging out like a dog’s. he looked like an indian on fire, howling and panting with the agony of being burned alive. While he was still a long way off, he bowed down low and approached Barsauma bent double, like this! all the time, as he came nearer, he hammered his head against the ground. 3 at last, panting, he got to the place where Barsauma was. The flames of fire which flared from satan were now beating against Barsauma’s habit, now ebbing away from it and

86. Cf. heb 2:14.

218

The Life of Barsauma

curling back on themselves. The holy man suffered not the slightest harm. satan was bent double at Barsauma’s feet, hammering his head against the ground. 4 Then satan was moving away again, walking backward and bowing and scraping to Barsauma all the while. When he was far enough away from him, he lifted his hands—which were still locked together—over his head, gave a great wail, and fled from the scene. 5 all of this the disciple saw distinctly. at first he supposed that everyone else could see it, too. But when he saw that no one else was affected by what was happening, he understood that by no means everyone had seen it. so he asked one of his companions, who was standing beside him: “Did you not just see something near our master?” “i saw nothing,” answered that brother. 6 “since you saw nothing,” said the disciple, “i shall tell you what happened. Death has just been defeated and put to flight.87 That means peace, quiet, and redemption for the world!” after that he told him exactly what he had seen. 7 his companion could not believe his ears. Then, between one word and another, in the middle of their conversation, he closed his eyes and seemed to fall asleep briefly. 8 he woke with a start and said: “so what you have been telling me is true, after all! Just now i saw something myself, as in a dream. our master took hold of a monstrous, savage camel, put three iron bits in its mouth, handed it over to you and two of our brethren, giving you green switches. 9 “‘fall on this destructive creature with these switches,’ he said, ‘and drive it out. it must be expelled from this region altogether. Chase it over the border into Cappadocia and leave it there!88 Do not let it come closer to Claudias than the village of X!’” 10 What they saw came to pass. The epidemic left Claudias altogether. When it next struck, it was in Cappadocia. The first village in that region where the fatal disease broke out was the one to which the camel was sent in that disciple’s vision. 11 Then there raged such pestilence in Cappadocia that many settlements were bereft of people, fell to ruins, and remained deserted for lack of settlers. § 73 The forty-sixth sign. The fatal disease. 1 as for Claudias, Barsauma went around the entire district, holding vigils with his disciples and offering up the oblations everywhere. The fatal disease stopped spreading, and the whole district through which he walked was spared. everyone praised god, to whom praise and honor is due forever and ever, amen! § 74

The forty-seventh sign. A disciple sees a wonder beside him in the night.

1 it was night. Barsauma had returned, to his cave in peace. he was standing outside the oratory of his disciples and singing a psalm with them. he intoned each verse on his own, and they responded with the second half. Thick snow was falling on him. a great storm-wind was roaring. 87. Cf. is 25:8. 88. This region included armenia ii (see Barrington atlas 1, J–K3), which shares a border with the district of Claudias (§ 70).

The Life of Barsauma

219

2 inside the oratory, performing the night office with his brethren, was the disciple who had had the first vision of death. he was distressed for Barsauma. What a gale he was standing in! What a contest he was engaged in! What extreme conditions he was enduring! 3 The disciple began to pray: “our lord Jesus Christ, what sin has he committed against You? This man loves You. he stays on his feet night and day, sustained by the hope which You have given him. Why should he, of all people, get such a beating in Your presence? 4 “Tortured by frost, seared by ice, snow devours, gales gnaw at him. he struggles to stay awake, yet tires himself out with prayer. Broiled by fasting, scorched by thirst, he keeps up the fight, though agony saps his strength. Burned by iron, tormented by sackcloth, all night he groans, all day he moans. Why do You make him go through this? he loves You with all his heart!’ 5 in answer to the disciple’s prayer, the lord opened his eyes and ears. all at once he saw a glorious sight and heard the sound of praise from many mouths. out of the oratory window he saw a bright light around Barsauma and heard a massed choir of angels loudly intoning the psalm with him. 6 at this he shook and shuddered and fell down on his face. he had supposed that all his brethren could see what he saw. When he saw them standing serenely in the order of their ranks, he realized that he was the only one who could see it. § 75 The forty-eighth sign. A seraph is seen collecting his tears while he weeps in prayer. 1 The next day Barsauma was praying at a distance from the brethren, since it was not yet time for the evening office, when one of his disciples happened to see him at his prayers, bent double with his hands clasped behind him, as was his custom. 2 a seraph from heaven stood facing him with two of its wings extended under his face. With one it collected his tears as they fell from his eyes, with the other it wiped away their traces. for a long time it remained with him like this. 3 at last Barsauma straightened himself and brought his prayers to a close with the sign of the cross, whereupon the seraph put two of its wings around his neck, raised the soles of its two feet from the ground, floated up, and stood on his shoulders. 4 When he began to walk away from that place, the seraph raised the soles of its feet again and stood on his head. Then, suddenly, it changed into a cross of light and flew up off his head into heaven. § 76

The forty-ninth sign. Third pilgrimage to Jerusalem. The cattle-killing disease.

1 later, after the necessary mental preparations, Barsauma made his third pilgrimage to Jerusalem. after many days on the road he reached the opulent town of Carrhae.89 The inhabitants of this town came out to meet him, carrying thuribles with incense and lamps. 89. according to the Peutinger Map “Charra” (h.arran: Barrington atlas 89, B4), south of edessa, was reached from samosata via the euphrates crossing at Zeugma, making it nearly a fortnight’s journey by roman road from Barsauma’s monastery.

220

The Life of Barsauma

2 They made a communal address to him: “sir, we beg you to help us! a disease fatal to cattle is spreading throughout this region. it fells livestock as a reaper cuts corn. Where it strikes not a single animal survives for miles around.” 3 Barsauma gave them this assurance: “i have confidence in Christ, whom i am going to worship in Jerusalem, that not a single head of the cattle belonging to this town will be lost in this epidemic.” Then he blessed them and went on his way in peace. 4 The great pestilence swept through that country, and all the cattle died. But in that town not one head was lost, a remarkable fact which was soon generally known. § 77 The fiftieth sign. The cattle-killing disease, again. 1 at that time the disease which killed cattle had broken out in many countries. This epidemic spread from the capital of lower Persis90 all the way to the islands in the Western sea, which belongs to the romans. 2 “There is no one who has the power to check the epidemic,” it was revealed to men, “except for Barsauma who dwells in the northern massif. god has given authority to him alone to stop the disease which kills animals, domestic and wild, and even people.” 3 Because of this revelation, made to many in dreams and visions, people from every country converged on Barsauma as he traveled along the road and to request his help in combatting this disease. 4 he sent them all on their way with the oil of prayer, which kept the epidemic away from them. if someone had a revelation about him and the people of that village went to see him, all their cattle survived. Conversely, where people ignored the revelation, all their cattle were lost. § 78

The fifty-first sign. Signs occur at sea.

1 Barsauma, accompanied by one hundred brethren, went to laodicea and took ship for Cyprus. after disembarking on that island91 the monks were assigned benches on two ships, one group being separated from Barsauma. his rule, incidentally, was the same at sea as on dry land. To the end of his life he never sat or lay down. 2 at sea a great storm broke, and many ships were lost. as for the ship on which Barsauma was standing, the waves passed over her and hid her from view, but no water fell inside the ship.92 The waves were spread out over that ship like a tent.93 3 flat on their faces at his feet, his disciples wept. Then one of them looked up to heaven and saw a lady wearing purple. she flew down close to the ship. “give glory to god,” she called, “and you will escape, safe and sound, from the sea!” 4 another disciple looked up to heaven and saw a tent-peg fixed in the sky. Three flaxen ropes, secured to that stake, had been thrown down onto the ship’s deck.94 5 The disciple who had the first vision now looked out to sea. There, large as life, on the surface of the water, were two angels, striding ahead, hauling the ship along with white 90. 91. 92. 93. 94.

The capital of fars was rew-ardashir (arabic: reishahr), on the northeast coast of the Persian gulf. Presumably at salamis: Barrington atlas 1, J3. Cf. Jon 2:3, 5; ex 14:22. Cf. ex 40:34. Cf. is 33:20.

The Life of Barsauma

221

ropes. each held a staff of cornelian in his other hand and with these they subdued the waves in the ship’s path. from then on no wave arched right over the ship, yet it still blew a raging gale. 6 at dawn, Barsauma said his prayers, then intoned the first of the morning psalms of praise. With the first note that came out of his mouth, the wind dropped and the din of the storm died away. 7 The ship’s captains still thought they were doomed. “That is it, then,” they said. “We shall never return to civilization (syriac: l-athro d-shayno). We are doomed to fall where the outer ocean goes steeply downward.”95 8 Then Barsauma’s disciples looked up and saw a bird flying toward them just above the surface of the sea; and that bird had a crown of cornelian on its head. 9 it circled the ship three times, then turned back in the direction from which it had come. at this the ship changed course and turned to follow the bird. “This is no ordinary bird,” said one of the brethren. “it is a sign of peace sent by god. We are going to reach land safe and sound.” § 79 The fifty-second sign. A Jew has a vision of him. 1 meanwhile, the other ship, in which half of Barsauma’s disciples were seated, was on the point of sinking, swamped by wave after towering wave. 2 in spite of the tempest which the ship was riding, one of the ship’s captains dozed off briefly. all of a sudden, this man started up and shouted to the brethren: “Which of you has a ruddy complexion and wears an iron tunic under sackcloth?” They answered: “That is our master’s description! he is in the other ship with the rest of the monks.” 3 now that man was a Jew from a distant country who had no idea of Barsauma’s appearance. he said: “i had a dream just now. a man was running across the sea, intent on sinking our ship, when another with a ruddy complexion, wearing an iron tunic under sackcloth, strode out from among us to confront him, saying: ‘This ship belongs to me. You have no right to touch it.’ 4 “The first man answered him: ‘at sea i have great authority and i intend to sink this ship.’ ‘i, too, have authority,’ said the man wearing the iron tunic, ‘on land and in heaven and at sea. everywhere, in fact. and my authority is greater than yours.’ at this, the killer took to his heels.” 5 so both ships came safe and sound to harbor. as for the Jew, he was converted to Christianity. § 80

The fifty-third sign. A Samaritan woman is healed.

1 in the region of Palestine there lies a city called sebaste.96 it was noon and Barsauma was waiting in the shade of an aqueduct to enter this city, when a teacher of the law (of moses), a samaritan, engaged him in debate.

95. lit. “We have fallen within the descent (mah. h. atto) of okeanos.” Cf. mi 1:4; acts 27:17 (Pesh): “the descent (mah. h. atteh) of the sea.” 96. samaria-sebaste: Barrington atlas 69, B5.

222

The Life of Barsauma

2 refuted from the text of the law, the samaritan raised the stakes: “my wife is confined to her bed with a fatal illness. she does not have long to live. if you can demonstrate that your doctrine is true by healing my wife with your prayers, then we shall both become Christians and so will my children!” 3 “give me the palm of your hand,” said Barsauma. “Take the oil i am going to give you and anoint your wife! if that does not heal her, what i teach is a falsehood.” 4 “how can i accept oil from you?” the samaritan protested. “it is unlawful for samaritans to deal with Christians.” But Barsauma persuaded him at last, and he went home with the oil of prayer and anointed his wife, who recovered instantaneously and acknowledged the messiah. 5 The man brought his wife and children to see Barsauma. he threw himself at his feet, sobbing, and the whole family became Christians. many others also came to see him; he spoke with them about the whole truth and performed many miracles there. § 81

The twenty-ninth distinction. His refusal of gifts and his instructions to the brethren.

1 in that country they brought him many gifts, but he refused to accept anything but food and drink for the brethren. 2 in his own monastery and the district where it lay Barsauma’s rule was to accept everything that was offered to him. But when he left his monastery and went on a journey, he accepted food and drink, but nothing else, neither gold, nor silver, nor bronze, nor clothes. 3 What is more, he had put all his disciples under a solemn obligation not to accept anything from anyone behind his back. 4 When his disciples were passing between grapevines, or through gardens, he allowed no one to stretch out his hand to pluck of the fruit and eat; and they kept this rule on their journeys as long as he lived. § 82

The fifty-fourth sign. He expels a devil from a man in Jerusalem.

1 Barsauma traveled on to Jerusalem. as soon as he got there, he went to the great church which was erected over golgotha and prayed in our redeemer’s tomb.97 2 he took up lodgings at a monastery beside the basilica (syriac: hayklo) of sion98 and returned secretly after nightfall to pray in the courtyard of the golgotha church. now many people were sleeping in that courtyard, in one of whom lurked an unclean spirit. 3 all of a sudden this devil cried out in a loud voice: “i know you are Barsauma, the warrior! Why have you come in like a thief against me? Do you mean to expose me and expel me from this man?” 4 “shut your mouth,” snapped Barsauma, “and be quiet! Do not speak! in Christ’s name, leave this man!” The demon left without a word, and the man was healed.

97. The Church of the holy sepulchre (greek: Anastasis). it was built by Constantine, beginning in 326. 98. Cf. §§ 95.4; 96.11.

The Life of Barsauma § 83

223

The thirtieth distinction. He refuses the gifts which the empress Eudocia offers him.

1 now it so happened that the empress eudocia was also visiting Jerusalem at that time.99 she had heard such reports about Barsauma that she sent him a great quantity of gold. he refused the gift. 2 she then sent him a long letter, requesting an interview; so he came to see her and he spoke with her at length. 3 afterward she prostrated herself at his feet, saying: “sir, if you know any way by which your servant may live, do not keep it from me! i implore you, show me the way which leads to salvation!” 4 “i know what i shall say to you,” he answered. “i shall say what Daniel said to King nebuchadnezzar of Babylon: ‘Pay for your sins with almsgiving and for your wickedness with mercy for the weak!’”100 5 “how can almsgiving redeem me from my sins?” the empress replied. “after all, it is not from the work of my hands that alms will be given. 6 “The martyrs offered their bodies as a sacrifice to god and reconciled him by their physical sufferings. Those who hold vigils and keep fasts give glory to god from the labor of their bodies; indeed, the labor of their bodies is considered equivalent to the agonies of the martyrs. 7 “all the poor, the orphans, and the widows offer the abasement and distress of their bodies to god as a sacrifice; when they give a morsel of bread to others in faith, the sacrifice of their hands is acceptable in heaven, because they give it from the labor of their bodies. 8 “as for me, however much i want to give, my alms will not be given at the cost of my own body’s discomfort, but at the cost of the labor and the exhaustion of the poor. my alms will not come out of what i myself need, like those of a pauper, but out of an excess of wealth. 9 “if a poor man gives a little of what he needs, he will go short. But i, even when i have given much, shall lack for nothing. in what way does my almsgiving resemble that of a distressed widow, who has earned a loaf of bread with the labor of her hands and gives half to one poorer than herself?” 10 When Barsauma heard this, he was amazed. “This is the way i see it,” he replied. “it is written in the gospel of Christ that the son of man will come in his glory and sit on the throne of his majesty. 11 “Then all the inhabitants of the earth shall assemble in his presence; and he will separate one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. he will make the lambs stand on his right and the goats on his left. 12 “The King will open his mouth and say to those righteous ones on his right: ‘Come in peace, blessed ones of the father! enter and inherit the Kingdom which has been prepared for you from the beginning!

99. The empress eudocia, consort of the emperor Theodosius ii, first visited Jerusalem in the spring of 438 or shortly afterward in thanksgiving for the marriage of her daughter eudoxia to the Western emperor Valentinian iii on 29 october 437. 100. Dn 4:27.

224

The Life of Barsauma

13 “‘for i was hungry and you gave me to eat, thirsty and you gave me to drink; i was a foreigner and you welcomed me, naked and you clothed me; i was sick and you nursed me, in prison and you visited me.’101 14 “now none of these promises are for the martyrs, nor for those who fast, nor for those who mourn, nor for the poor; they were all made to those who do good and give alms. 15 “it is well known which promises have been made to the martyrs and to those who fast; and something else again has been promised to the poor. our lord did not say to those righteous ones: ‘You fasted,’ or ‘You kept vigil,’ or ‘You were persecuted,’ or ‘You were impoverished.’ 16 “as for those on the left, on whom he said there was a curse, and whom he sent into the fire which is never extinguished, he did not send them into the fire because of the number of their sins, but because, while possessing all good things themselves, they did not alleviate the lot of the poor. 17 “Perhaps those sinners even had other works which were good. But because they did not nourish the poor, their other works, however good, were not accepted. Their good works were deprived of their just reward because of their lack of mercy. 18 “as for the righteous ones who inherited the Kingdom of heaven, they may have had shortcomings as well. But those shortcomings were overlooked because of the compassion they showed to unfortunate people.” 19 “after all, the Kingdom of heaven is promised to the poor. Did not our lord say, ‘Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of heaven!’ ”102 20 “for the rich, on the other hand, there is unhappiness in store. Did not our redeemer say in his gospel: ‘You rich people have nothing good to look forward to. You have already received your consolation!’ ”103 21 “But then again, our redeemer added this: ‘Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy!’104 so if the rich act mercifully toward the poor, they will be spared the misfortune which had been prepared for them. Together with the poor, they will inherit the Kingdom which is prepared for them. god is not unjust: he will not leave out of account the alms which are given in faith by the wealthy.” 22 When the empress eudocia heard this, she began to grovel at Barsauma’s feet, shedding bitter tears. “my lord,” she sobbed, “i thought there was no way for me to be saved. i have committed so many sins, i have lost count of them.”105 23 “now that i have it on your unerring authority, that there is indeed hope for sinners such as me, i shall practice this virtue with all my strength. i understand that this is the way for me to earn salvation.”

101. mt 25:33–36; the following passage continues to refer to mt 25:31–46. 102. mt 5:3. 103. lk 6:24. 104. mt 5:7. 105. late in 441 or early in 442 the empress eudocia withdrew from Constantinople to the holy land, perhaps because of rumors that she had committed adultery. These rumors date from after her first pilgrimage.

The Life of Barsauma

225

24 from that day onward the empress began to give charitable gifts to the poor in plenty. she continued to do so all the days of her life. 25 she urged Barsauma forcefully to accept some gift from her, but he refused. 26 Barsauma was already near the door of her house and about to leave, when she took hold of his cloak. “since you refuse to accept a gift from me, a sinner, a gift of which you have no need, leave your cloak for me! i want it—i need it to obtain salvation!” 27 so she took from him the cloak which had been wrapped around him and draped it beside her as a blessing. only then did she let him leave her house. 28 as soon as Barsauma had set out on his journey back home, she took her own precious veil and sent it to him with the following message, to which she added great oaths: “Do not reject this small blessing which your servant has offered to the altar of your god. That would break my heart.” 29 “i have not sent anything to you personally, because you have shut the door of your will in my face, as we both know. i have only sent a small offering to you as to a priest of god. so please offer it to god, like a true priest, on my behalf. god’s door, after all, is open to sinners!” 30 now Barsauma was deeply troubled because she had used the name of god to force his hand; but in consideration of her oaths, he overcame his reluctance and accepted the veil, which he would adapt to the service of god’s altar. § 84 The fifty-fifth sign. A Samaritan boy is healed. 1 on his way home Barsauma again passed through samaria. he happened to be in a certain village on the sabbath Day, and all the inhabitants came to see him. They disputed with him about the resurrection of the dead and the son of god, both of which they denied, as they denied the existence of the holy spirit and the angels. 2 Barsauma disputed with them on the basis of the law of moses, because the samaritans do not accept any other scripture. he went through the law word by word, from the beginning to the end, proving his point to them.106 3 When the samaritans found their tenets refuted from the law of moses, they resorted, with one accord, to the following proof: “look, there is a boy here who is on his death-bed. his fate has been sealed. if you can bring this boy back to life, we will believe in your Christ and in the resurrection of the dead.” 4 Barsauma gladly accepted this challenge. The boy was fetched, and Barsauma went up to him and took hold of his hand, saying: “in the name of the Christ whom i worship, i command you, child, arise!” instantly, the boy opened his eyes, revived, and arose, his health restored. 5 That evening his father joined the brethren, standing between their choirs, with that boy holding his right, his brother his left hand and another son on his shoulders. 6 seeing this, Barsauma remarked: “What this samaritan has done is like that passage in the Prophets, where it says, ‘Behold, i and the sons whom the lord has given me!’”107 many other samaritans in that place also became Christians because of what had happened there. 106. Cf. mk 12:18–26. 107. is 8:18.

226 § 85

The Life of Barsauma The fifty-sixth sign. Crowds come out to meet him, and he stops a cattle epidemic.

1 Traveling on toward the east, Barsauma was given a festive escort in the cities and villages of every district he passed through. at the boundary of each city’s territory, its bishop, its judge, and a vast crowd of people were waiting to make him welcome. he performed many signs which are not written in this book before arriving back, safe and sound, at his monastery. 2 Thus the whole region of syria was filled with joy at his coming. But many came to him from other regions as well because of the epidemic which was destroying the cattle everywhere; and wherever Barsauma’s writ ran, the sickness was arrested. § 86 The fifty-seventh sign. The clairvoyant boy. 1 There was a certain small boy in a certain village who was possessed by a spirit of clairvoyance. he told people’s fortunes; and his predictions were frequently correct. People came to him from far and near and to each he told his future. even priests and learned men were led astray by him, for they thought that he prophesied by the inspiration of the holy spirit. But when Barsauma heard, he said: “This boy does not prophesy by the holy spirit, but by the spirit of satan.” 2 now Barsauma happened to go through the village where that fortune-teller lived; so he summoned the boy’s father. “my son,” he told him, “do not let satan trick you into doing his will! as for your wretched son, he is possessed by a fortune-telling demon.” at this the man boiled with anger: “Do not be envious of my son,” he said, “just because his celebrity is equal to your own! This country is big enough for both of you.” 3 Barsauma retorted: “is that what you think of me, son of perdition? That i am consumed with envy?” “it is plain to see,” the man answered back, “that envy has made its home in you.” “if i say this to you out of envy,” Barsauma snapped, “may the lance of the lord be directed straight at me! But if i have spoken to you in love, you will soon pay the penalty.” 4 The very next day—Barsauma had gone to another village—the man’s fellow villagers came to him. “my lord,” they said, with tears in their eyes, “that man whom you cursed yesterday evening fell down and burst open in the night. We buried him first, then came to see you. The boy who used to tell people’s fortunes and his brother are coming after us. They, too, are weeping.” 5 When those two boys caught sight of Barsauma from a distance, a demon took control of one of them and he began to cry out as he came nearer. When they both caught up with him, the other boy’s demon lifted him off the ground and dropped him there in front of Barsauma. Then both of the evil spirits yelled as one: “We are spirits of fraudulence with the outward appearance of truthfulness. But your presence, Barsauma, is like the furnace in which metal is shown to be debased.” 6 By way of answer Barsauma barked a command: “Come out of these boys in the name of Christ!” instantly, the unclean spirits came out of them and they were healed. § 87

The fifty-eighth sign. Hail falls from heaven.

1 now Barsauma lived on the lands of a certain village, where he had friends. he had given these friends some advice which was meant in a good way. But somehow the advice had given them the impression that he wanted to harm them in some way.

The Life of Barsauma

227

2 The next day Barsauma left his monastery and went to the vineyard of those friends. While he was still a long way off, he called the brethren who were with him to witness: “in a moment i am going to ask our lord to give me a sign of his favor. The moment we enter that vineyard over there, i am going to pray for a sign. i shall pray for much hail to fall, but only in a circle around the vineyard, not further off, while the vineyard itself remains undamaged. Then the owners will know that my intentions toward them are good.” 3 Then Barsauma entered the vineyard, and as yet there was no cloud in the sky. But when he bent double in prayer, there was a great clap of thunder directly above it and the vineyard was encircled with cloud, like a sheepfold. suddenly great stones of hail were pelting down, but only just outside the vineyard fence. inside nothing bad happened, nor did a single stone fall further off. 4 at this the owners, who had been standing next to him, prostrated themselves at his feet, abjectly weeping. as for Barsauma, he exulted. a quantity of hail had piled up outside the wall. “That should convince you,” Barsauma said, “that my intentions toward you are good.” from then on those people were like good slaves to him, dedicated, body and soul, to his service. § 88

The fifty-ninth sign. A new source begins to flow.

1 There was a certain large village where they had great faith in him and held him in high regard. Consequently, Barsauma had a great love for that particular village. one day, when he came to visit them, the villagers, from the greatest to the least, gathered around him in vast numbers, while he preached to them, as was his custom, the word of god. 2 afterward the people raised the following matter: “sir, this village is populous and rich in livestock. But there is no water nearby. We draw our water from a deep river-gorge. This is exhausting work, both for the people and for their beasts of burden.” 3 “are you not able,” Barsauma inquired, “to dig wells?” “We cannot find any water here,” they replied, “because our village is situated on a high mountain.” on hearing this, Barsauma asked: “Where would be the most suitable place for a source?” They said that where they happened to be standing would be just the place. Then god’s slave108 said: “let everyone leave this place!” so they all moved back. 4 Barsauma then knelt down on the dry earth and prayed. When he had finished his prayers and was preparing to go, all of a sudden a source was opened and began to well up in that place. after blessing the water, which was already gushing out in plenty, Barsauma scooped up a palmful of it—the firstfruits, as it were—and poured it into the chalice of the oblation. Then everyone came and partook of that water. This miracle caused general rejoicing, and everyone praised god. § 89

His fourth pilgrimage to Jerusalem.

1 soon after this there was great commotion in the city of samosata on account of what the empress eudocia had done, and Barsauma left for Jerusalem in order to be near the empress, who was there. all syria and Palestine were in commotion, too. even the emperor Theodosius came to hear of it. 108. Cf. heb 3:5.

228

The Life of Barsauma § 90

The sixtieth sign. The righteous Jacob has a revelation.

1 When Barsauma came to Cyrrhestica109 on his way to antioch, the righteous man who resided110 next to the city of Cyrrhus111 sent his representatives to meet him. so Barsauma visited him and was joyfully received by him. That night Barsauma stayed with him. 2 Barsauma was leaning (on his staff), asleep on his feet, when Jacob suddenly looked up and saw a ball of fire above Barsauma’s head; it remained there for a long time. Jacob was amazed. The day after, he told the brethren who were with him what he had seen. 3 on the morning of that day Barsauma took leave of Jacob and went down to antioch. all the city came out to welcome him; but he continued down to the harbor, where he embarked on a ship bound for Palestine. 4 after coming ashore, he traveled to Jerusalem incognito, warning his disciples constantly not to reveal his identity to anyone. so he entered the city secretly112 and took up lodgings in a certain large monastery where he was known.113 5 When those monks saw him, they taken by surprise. he raised his hand. “i hope you are not going to tell anyone about me!” he said. “give me a few days’ respite to recover from my journey!” so they kept quiet about it and told no one. § 91

The sixty-first sign. The Jews assemble en masse and meet their deaths.

1 now what had happened earlier was this. The priests and the leaders of the Jewish people from the whole land of galilee and its environs had and gone up to Jerusalem together to present a long petition to the empress eudocia. They praised her with resounding acclamations: “You are the mistress of the World and we are the slaves of your royal highness. Without you we are unable to live. The emperor Constantine the great issued a decree forbidding us to enter the district of Jerusalem. have mercy on your slaves and permit us now to enter the ruins of the temple which solomon built and pray there!” 2 The empress eudocia granted the Jews their request, issuing the following decree: “The Jews have the right to enter Jerusalem and pray in the temple that was built by King solomon.” 3 having obtained this decree from the empress, the Jews leapt for joy. The spirit of arrogance entered them, only to make their shame the greater in the end. They wrote a letter to the Jewish people and sent it to the various provinces of Persia and to all the great cities of the roman empire.

109. Barrington atlas 67, D-f3, the whole region between the ʻamūq Valley and the euphrates. 110. note the variant reading “resides,” which, if correct, implies that Jacob of Cyrrhestica was still alive when this was written. This might explain why the writer seems to assume, in § 90.1, that the reader knows his name. 111. Jacob lived on a hill about 5.5 km from Cyrrhus (Theodoret, Hist. rel. 21); cf. evagrius, Eccl. hist. 2.9. 112. Cf. Jn 7:10. 113. This was the monastery of Photina on mount sion, as Barsauma’s disciples reveal at § 95.4.

The Life of Barsauma

229

4 “To the great and mighty people of the Jews from the priests and leaders of galilee: warm greetings!” such was their opening. “We write to inform you that the time of our people’s diaspora is past. The day has come for our tribes to be reunited. The roman emperors have decreed that our city, Jerusalem, is to be restored to us. make haste, then, and come to Jerusalem for the feast of Tabernacles! our kingdom is going to be established in Jerusalem!” There was much more of the same, but this was the gist of their letter. 5 With false hopes raised by this misleading letter a great number of Jews assembled at Jerusalem. observing the appointed time, they entered the city on the feast of Tabernacles. now on the very day when the Jews entered Jerusalem openly for the first time, Barsauma entered the same city in secret. 6 Barsauma entered Jerusalem at noon, hastily left the monastery, and went down discreetly to pray at the Pool of siloah.114 Then he went back to the monastery where he was staying. 7 about twenty of his brethren went their separate way up to the ruined temple of solomon to see the “pinnacle of the temple” where satan placed our savior when he tempted him and said: “Throw yourself down from here!”115 8 When Barsauma’s disciples looked closely at the ruins of the temple built by solomon, they saw great numbers of Jews, clothed in black, who wept, shredded their clothing, sprinkled ashes on their heads, and sat down on the ruins of the temple, groaning. it was noon. 9 The Jews who were assembled there numbered about one hundred and three thousand men and women. When disciples saw them, they were standing right opposite them, in full view. § 92 The sixty-second sign. The Jewish people have a vision. 1 one of the brethren who were standing there saw all those Jewish people clothed in black and sitting on the ashes of the ruined building and there welled up in his mind a passage from the Prophets. This disciple asked two of his companions: “Which passage from the Prophets do you think is going to come true any moment now?” They said: “We do not know.” 2 “There are two predictions in the Prophets,” he went on, “which are about to come true. But look out! We must hurry away from here! The Wrath of the lord is on the point of striking the Jewish people!” “What words are written about this moment?” his companions asked; then he said clearly which passages he meant.116 3 hardly had he finished explaining the words when a sudden great clamor was heard from the Jews. They were screaming in terror and running in all directions. a frightening vision had appeared to them: god’s armies were bearing down on them from heaven. The Jews could see this apparition, but the Christians could see nothing. one or two of the disciples did, however, see sand rising up like a cloud and covering the Jews.

114. Cf. neh 3:15; Jn 9. 115. mt 4:5–7. 116. These passages have not yet been identified. is 31:5, Jer 31:23, and Dn 9:24–27 are potential candidates.

230

The Life of Barsauma

4 many stones were flying through that cloud and raining blows on the Jews. no one could tell where those stones were coming from. all the Jews had cut skins and broken bones. many of them died there and then, many others a few days later. as for the rest, they were badly wounded. many were maimed, or lamed. § 93 The sixty-third sign. A brother, stoned by the Jews, does not feel the stones hitting him. 1 The brother who had referred those passages of scripture to this occasion was mobbed by the Jews, who shouted: “This is the teacher of the Christians. he ought to be stoned!” Then they surrounded him and pelted him with stones. They went on doing this for a long time, but not a stone hit his body, not the slightest scratch did he receive. 2 at the sound of the screaming all Jerusalem came out, from the greatest to the least. The Christians saw the Jews broken, cut, and cast down on the ground. The Jews were ashamed to admit that the blow had fallen squarely from heaven on them. To cover their shame, they were shouting: “Those Christians massacred us.” 3 When the soldiers and the clergy (κληρικοί) heard this, they said it was true. now the empress eudocia had decreed that no one should harm the Jewish people. The clergy now sought to ingratiate themselves with her by taking sides with the Jews and joined them in trying to catch and arrest Barsauma’s disciples. The brethren landed plenty of blows on the clergy and the soldiers. 4 The soldiers, the clergy, and the Jews acted together. Their next step was to cut themselves branches from the olive-trees and surround the palace of the empress in Bethlehem, about six miles away from Jerusalem. They began to salute her with their olive-branches, adding: “some ruffians have come from mesopotamia wearing the respectable habit (σχῆμα) of monks. They have provoked a great conflict in the city and have ruined it. it is plain to see that many people have been killed. They are lying in the streets. The courtyards and the cisterns are filled with the corpses of the massacred.” 5 When the empress eudocia heard this, she was extremely worried. she could see great bruises on the clergy and the soldiers. Thinking their version of events was true, she shuddered with fear and sent in the army to seize the murderers. 6 as for the disciples of Barsauma, when they saw that the roman army had come out against them, they began to say among themselves: “This means we are all going to die. let us at least keep it a secret that we are the disciples of Barsauma! otherwise, many will turn against him, as our leader. after all, we are going to be put to death today as murderers!” 7 The soldiers and the cathedral clergy arrested eighteen of the brethren. They rained harsh blows on them, insulting them with the vilest of names and spitting in their faces. as for the brethren, they rejoiced and exulted. This made the soldiers and the clergy, who thought they were really murderers, grind their teeth in fury. 8 Then one of the brethren climbed up and stood on top of a boulder. he made a gesture to the people to be quiet and began to speak in a loud voice: “We do not despise you, as you think; nor is it because we are murderers that we are laughing. it is just that we are filled with joy to think where it is that god considers us worthy to die. our fathers’ bones will exult in their graves. Christ has given us sinners the privilege of being put to death in Jerusalem. in Jerusalem, where prophets and apostles have been massacred. in Jerusalem, where

The Life of Barsauma

231

Christ himself was crucified. now that we, too, are going to die in Jerusalem, innocent of any crime, we should indeed be glad. 9 “But you, who are killing us for nothing, must prepare yourselves for the weeping and the gnashing of teeth which is kept in store for your brothers, the Jews. Your friends, the crucifiers. This is because you have joined forces with that abominable party to kill those who worship the Crucified. We have a true hope in the Crucified, whom we have come here to worship, that he will show you signs and wonders and that you will be put to shame.” 10 at this the soldiers and the clergy dragged that brother violently off the boulder, forced him to the ground, insulted and beat him. Then they took the brethren and locked them up alive in the military prison (syriac: beth signas, from τὰ σίγνα).117 11 The empress decreed that a judge should hear the brethren the following day and put them to death. in the morning, the Jews brought the corpses of their dead and piled them up at the door of the prison. Then the empress gave orders that her most trusted officials (syriac: šarrīrē) and the priests (syriac: qaššīšē) of the cathedral were to go and inspect the corpses. 12 The orders she gave were as follows: “if the Jews were killed with sticks, let sticks be used to kill their murderers! if their corpses bear the marks of stoning, let those who stoned them die in the same way! if it was knives and swords that killed them, let their killers’ bodies be cut into pieces with knives and swords!”118 13 When the imperial officials and the cathedral priests arrived, they had the corpses stripped. But they could not see a single bruise from a stick on them, nor any injury caused by a stone, nor any wound inflicted with iron. There was not a cut on their skins, not a broken bone in their bodies. § 94

The sixty-fourth sign. A Jewish woman shrivels up.

1 all of a sudden, while they were inspecting those corpses, a Jewish woman fell down beside these and died in front of their eyes. immediately she shriveled up and became like a piece of dry wood. The imperial officials saw her and were mightily afraid. one of them said to his companions: “These corpses may all have been killed by the monks; but who killed the woman who died just now in front of our eyes?” 2 The imperial officials proclaimed: “let the Jewish priests (syriac: kohnē) be seized and handcuffed until they reveal who slaughtered these corpses!” Then the soldiers began to carry out these orders. 3 suddenly, however, the Jewish priests shouted: “We beg of your authority, do not let us perish because of those righteous men who have been imprisoned! release them and let them go in peace! We have sinned against god. it is god’s wrath that has killed us. 4 “We were sitting on the ashes of the temple and grieving, watched by those Christians, when we saw, all at once, a great host of angels bearing shining spears. The next thing we saw was a great army of soldiers coming against us from the direction of those Christians, their drawn swords flashing like lightning. 117. originally the shrine in a legionary camp, where the standards were kept under lock and key. 118. Cf. ex 21:24; lv 24:20.

232

The Life of Barsauma

5 “in our terror we screamed out loud and fell down, bowled over by fear. all these corpses which are lying in front of you died of sheer terror. We were ashamed to admit god’s wrath was the cause of our death, so we accused those righteous men of a crime. They have committed no sin.” 6 “Who can bear witness to this?” asked the imperial officials. “The corpses themselves,” said the Jewish priests. “Those who lost their lives bear witness. Their bodies display no wound inflicted by steel, no injury caused by a stone. had they been killed by these Christians, the blows of stones and steel would have left their marks. as for the fact that we saw the hosts of angels, all our people can bear witness to that.” 7 This statement was supported by all the Jewish people. “The testimony of our priests is true,” they said. “release the righteous men who have been imprisoned and let them go in peace! We do not want all our people to perish because of them!” having seen that woman’s sudden death, they were mortally afraid. They thought that they would all die as she had done, shriveling up like a piece of dry wood. That is why they shouted out: “release the righteous men and let them go in peace! We do not want all our people to perish because of them!” 8 The imperial officials, the clergy, and the soldiers were all afraid. The Christian people were also troubled. They had not realized before that a blow from god had wrought havoc among the Jews. 9 as for the imperial officials, when they heard and saw what had happened, they reported swiftly to their mistress, the empress eudocia, who groaned and was mortally afraid. she sent a petition to the brethren who were in prison, with the following entreaty: “forgive me this offense! i was unaware of it. many led me astray. i thought you had brought conflict to our city by massacring the Jews. But now god has brought the truth to light. Your innocence is proven.” § 95

The sixty-fifth sign. Five Jewish men shrivel up.

1 after this the empress ordered that the corpses be buried, and some Jews lifted up their dead to take them out of the city. The entire Christian community went out with the Jews to watch. 2 now certain Christians began to say to one another: “Perhaps it was out of fear that the Jews said they had seen hosts of angels.” at that moment five of the Jewish corpsebearers fell down dead, their bodies as hard as stones. This convinced the entire Christian people community. now everyone acknowledged that the blow which had fallen on the Jews had come from god. 3 The officials reported this event also to their mistress, the empress, at which she became so much afraid that she fell into a dead faint. she sent an abject entreaty to those brethren who were in prison. The imperial officials opened the door of the military prison, went in, and prostrated themselves in front of the brethren, the tears streaming down their cheeks. The brethren were aware of none of the things which had happened, so the officials and the clergy told them all that god had done to the Jews, and invited them to take some food and drink some water. 4 once the brethren realized that they were not going to be executed, they told the imperial officials and the cathedral priests about their master: “We are the slaves of a certain righteous man. our master is here in Jerusalem with us. We cannot eat or drink without his

The Life of Barsauma

233

permission.” “Who is your master,” they asked, “and where is he?” “our master,” the brethren answered, “is Barsauma. he lodges at the monastery of Photina of sion.”119 5 now when they learned that they were Barsauma’s disciples and that he was there in the city, a great confusion fell on them and they began to raise a great clamor. Then the entire Christian people, from the greatest to the least, began to run to the place where Barsauma was and prostrated themselves at his feet, weeping and groaning. 6 This, too, was reported to the empress eudocia, who shuddered with the greatest possible trepidation and, deeply ashamed, sent an urgent plea to Barsauma: “You know, sir, how the Jewish people oppress and persecute the Christians, so i entreat your holy person not to harbor resentment toward me. The governor (ἡγεμών) will come and, by lawful means, release your disciples from the military prison in which they are being held. in the eyes of justice, your disciples are not guilty. But in order to prevent the Jews from slandering me and saying that i have acted out of regard for your person, i want them to be released by the intervention of a judge.” 7 The empress sent to the governor at Caesarea-on-sea to come and release those brethren from prison. Between the messenger’s departure and the governor’s arrival six full days went by. 8 now many bishops happened to be present in Jerusalem at that time. When these heard the empress’s words, they thought her intention was to help the Jews. so the rumor spread among the Christians that the empress intended to kill the brethren in some underhand manner. People began to say: “let us set fire to the empress and to all her entourage!” 9 Then the bishops wrote a binding letter to all cities and their regions, summoning the masses to show their support for the brethren. so the masses flocked to Jerusalem, which was filled to the limit; indeed, the city could not hold the great number which gathered. They were waiting to see what decree the empress would issue in the end; then they were going to burn her with fire. 10 six days went by, and the governor came with a great retinue. he kept his distance from Jerusalem, fearing to enter the city, in case they should stone him. he sent the following message to the brethren in prison: “i am a Christian and a slave and worshipper of all Christians. i beg you on my bended knee, let your word rule the masses! Tell them not to stone me for your sake! Then i will be able to come in and visit you with peaceful intentions, to receive your blessing and to deal with your case, that you may be released with honor and great rejoicing.” 11 The brethren were still on their guard against the governor, in case he was coming with treacherous intent. so they sent word to him: “if you come as a man of peace, we, too, are men of peace. But if you come with treacherous intent, beware! We are armed with the power of Christ. Whatever your intention, we shall receive you in the same spirit.”

119. Józef T. milik, “la topographie de Jérusalem vers la fin de l’époque byzantine,” Mélanges de l’Université Saint Joseph 37 (1960–61): 164–67, locates this monastery next to the church of the nameless samaritan woman of Jn 4:1–30, whose name, as tradition claimed to know, was “saint Photina the samaritan” (ernest honigmann, Le couvent de Barsauma et le patriarcat jacobite d’Antioche et de Syrie, CsCo 146, subsidia 7 [louvain: imprimerie orientaliste l. Durbecq, 1954], 17).

234

The Life of Barsauma

12 Then the brethren sent out heralds throughout the city and its outskirts to make the following public announcement: “The righteous men who are in prison have given this order. let no one prevent the governor from coming in!” 13 Just then Barsauma joined his disciples in their prison. They welcomed him with mixed feelings. They were happy to see their hero, of course; but they wept, too, because they were in prison. § 96 The sixty-sixth sign. An earthquake in Jerusalem. 1 Then the governor entered the place where they were. he stood there in front of them, shaking with fear, and said: “i have not come to judge you. Your case has been judged by god and he has resolved it. i have come by imperial decree to represent the secular law. i do not want to hear many words, only the cause of the incident. let the eldest among you tell me in no more than ten sentences how it all began. innumerable people are assembled, waiting to hear your defense.” 2 it was Barsauma who opened his mouth to give the judge his answer. But with the second word which came from his lips, a violent earthquake started. from the belly of the earth was heard something like the sound of loud thunder. There arose a cacophony in which the sounds of wood creaking, stones grinding, and people groaning were mixed together. The next moment a huge roar emerged from the bellies of the people. The ceilings of buildings were being lifted right off their walls, and all the columns were knocking into one another. 3 as for the judge, he was lying prostrate at Barsauma’s feet, on the point of dying of fear, and others fell—shouting, trembling, weeping—on top of him. 4 Then the earthquake subsided. The buildings stood firm. By the will of god, each and every one of the columns which had been knocking into one another was established on its own base. in the earthquake which shook Jerusalem, violent as it had been, not a single person died, nor did the buildings of the city collapse. evidently, the grace of god prevented the city from collapsing, so that the Christians might have no trouble because of Barsauma. 5 meanwhile, Barsauma grasped the governor’s hand and, after a considerable struggle, raised him up. Then, holding him by the arms, he said: “have no fear! You are not going to die.” 6 mustering his courage, the man recovered his strength, stood up, and ordered the heralds to proclaim: “The Crucified has overcome.” hereupon the entire people without exception, both outside and within, began to cry out: “The Crucified has overcome.” The voice of the people continued to thunder, gaining in strength, for a long time, like the din of a storm at sea, and the city’s buildings were shaken again by the prodigious noise of that shouting. 7 at this point Barsauma, in the company of the governor, came out onto the street. The governor urged him to intone the response to the first psalm of the office, but Barsauma delegated this task to one of his disciples. 8 now that disciple had his eye on the Jews, who were trembling. he glimpsed samaritans, who were becoming agitated and making as if to escape. he looked at the pagans, who were hanging their heads in order to hide their faces. The Christians, by contrast, were filled with exultation. inspired by what he saw, he composed a response and intoned the psalm in a loud voice.

The Life of Barsauma

235

Behold, the Jews are ashamed; the samaritans sit and mourn. The pagans bow down their heads; the Church exults in the Cross. 9 This was the psalm he intoned. let god arise and let all his enemies be scattered! let those who hate him make their escape from his presence!120 With a powerful massed voice, the crowds repeated the response after the disciple. as for the Jews, the samaritans, and the pagans, they began to distance themselves from the Christians, running in all directions. 10 meanwhile, the Christian people praised god with the voice of thanksgiving. They constituted choirs, each race singing in its own tongue: romans, syrians, greeks, Persians, Palestinians, and egyptians. many peoples’ praises were mingled there. it was like the roar of a storm-wind above the clash of the ocean-waves. on the governor’s instructions the choirs involved in chanting that office were counted and found to be five hundred in number. all the monks of the wilderness and all the people from the villages and the cities were there. 11 surrounded by the choir of his brethren, Barsauma processed through the city. many poured out fine wines and select oils on the ground in front of him, scattered expensive spices in his direction as he walked, or sprinkled him with expensive perfumes. They escorted Barsauma to the great church which had been constructed on mount sion, and he offered up the oblation there.121 12 a full account in writing of the events occasioned by Barsauma was sent by the judge to the emperor Theodosius and to the greater cities. everyone who heard it read out glorified god, to whom indeed praise, honor, and thanks are due, forever and ever, amen! 13 now the empress eudocia was much alarmed. she urged Barsauma with many tears and spoke to him as follows: “sir, i am your servant. all my possessions are at your disposal.” 14 “far be it from me,” said Barsauma in answer, “that i should leave the Door of god, at which i stand, and stand at the door of human beings, who are beneath me. for god’s Door, at which we stand, opens swiftly whenever we choose to knock; and once we have entered there, we find there everything we love. When we are in need, he gladly gives whatever we ask for. 15 “But your door does not open for us every time we knock, nor do the doors of other human beings; and once we have entered through your doorway, we do not find in your house everything we love. When we are in need, you do not give us whatever we ask for. 16 “Therefore we will not leave the great Door at which we stand and knock at your door. We shall take everything that we need from the great Door at which we stand. We have no need of any human’s door.” 17 after this the empress bowed down low at his feet, and he departed in peace. 18 on the morning of the following day, when Barsauma prepared to leave Jerusalem, a great number of Christians gathered at the place where he was staying. from the morning until the evening Barsauma continued to teach them the word of god.

120. Ps 68:1. 121. This was presumably the hagia sion church, in the southwest corner of the city.

236

The Life of Barsauma

19 many people of other religions came, too, though without being open about their religion. When they heard his teaching on faith, each and every one of them began to weep for himself. many of them, convinced by his teaching, became believers. 20 at sunset, Barsauma left Jerusalem and set out for the east. The entire population of the city saw him off with censers and incense, candles and lamps. The greatest and the least were united in their grief. Barsauma prayed over them, blessed them, and sent them off, back to the city. his sea-voyage was serene. § 97

Many signs which are not written in this book.

1 The last part of the way he covered on foot, and all the cities and villages came out to meet him with their bishops, their monks, and the administrators of their provinces. he performed many signs in a number of different places, while he was traveling along that way, and halted many diseases fatal to man or beast. at last, serene, he arrived back inside his monastery. § 98

The sixty-seventh sign. A village, cursed by him, is swept away by the Euphrates.

1 a great dispute arose between two large towns on the river euphrates. When both parties went to Barsauma’s place to pray, he spoke to those who were in the wrong: “my sons, do not upset your brothers! make peace with them! We are all going to die and return to the dust from which we came. let us not burden ourselves with sins deserving of eternal damnation for the sake of this soil from which we were created!” 2 But those people, thinking he was taking sides with their neighbors, answered with one voice: “We came to you for prayer, not for judgment. You have not been set up as judge over us. let this matter be our concern!” 3 “i may not be your judge,” he persisted, “but i wish you peace and tranquility. however, since you reject love and peace, listen and i will tell you my judgment. Whether these brothers of yours have wrongfully encroached on your territory, or you on theirs, that town which is the cause of offense to its neighbors will become the riverbed. The lord will see to it.” 4 not long after that, god commanded the euphrates to leave its original course. it flowed straight toward the town of those wrongdoers, sweeping its houses away, overthrowing its monuments, dragging away its wood, carrying its stones a great way off, destroying its beautiful vineyards, pulling up its fine vegetable-gardens, washing away the earth from its good lands, and uprooting its delightful plantations. it became a stretch of rocky rapids in the course of the euphrates. Thus Barsauma’s curse was fulfilled. § 99

The sixty-eighth sign. The two bows of many colors.

1 one day, around the same time, while Barsauma was at his monastery, he saw two small bows back-to-back, colored like those which appear in the clouds on a rainy day. “What is the rainbow-colored sign over there?” he asked his brethren. They did not know what to say. 2 at the time, they did not understand the hidden meaning of what had happened. But when Barsauma came into protracted conflict with perverse heresies, his disciples understood that those variegated bows had been a sign from god that he would overcome.

The Life of Barsauma

237

3 god gave noah the bow in the clouds as a sign of victory, that he might make war on satan, who had overpowered that ruinous generation, causing them to be overwhelmed by the waters of the flood.122 4 in the same way he gave the two bows of victory to Barsauma, that he might take the two covenants of the scriptures in his right hand and in his left and make war on the party of the apostates (syriac: kōfūrē),123 whom satan has killed by the urge to investigate. Paul said something similar with reference to the cross.124 § 100

The sixty-ninth sign. Water is turned into milk.

1 at another time the water and oil in a lamp were turned into milk in Barsauma’s presence. This happened at dawn after an all-night vigil. § 101

The seventieth sign. A sweet smell fills the air, and an angel appears.

1 The following day was a sunday. Barsauma was standing outside the window of the building and singing in antiphony with his disciples when a smell of incense unlike any other filled the air and the angel of the lord suddenly appeared, standing between the two choirs of the brethren while they performed the service. his appearance was that of an old man clothed in white. now this fragrance was often to be smelt where Barsauma was. § 102

Many signs which have not been written down.

1 other signs also appeared in the place where he used to pray. But the signs which god performed where he was are so many in number that i have left them out, because of my inadequacy. i now come, therefore, to the end of his contest (ἀγών), the last part of the tale of his victorious deeds. § 103 The death of Zachariah, alias Zut.o the Mountaineer, the bishop of Samosata. 1 Barsauma had now got the better of his enemy in the fight and was on the way to winning the crown of a champion (ἀθλητής). satan had been exposed by trials of his own design. at this juncture, the zenith of the holy man’s fortunes and the nadir of the opposing party’s, Zachariah, Barsauma’s fellow student—called “Zut.o the mountaineer” among the brethren—became bishop of samosata.125 2 motivated by envy of his righteousness, wicked men stirred up a conspiracy against this bishop and bribed some of the soldiers of the city to stone him in the street. When the stoning began, he stretched his hands toward heaven and said to his fellow bishops: “leave me, everyone! i intend to die alone!” Then he went to sleep in peace, surrendered his spirit to Christ, and was buried. 122. gn 6:11f.; 9:8–17. 123. The majority of bishops at Chalcedon overturned the synod of 449, which had opposed Dyophysitism, and so were described as apostates by the party to which Barsauma belonged. 124. 2 Cor 6:7; cf. 2 Cor 6:2–10. 125. Cf. § 12.

238

The Life of Barsauma

3 Because of this stoning, Barsauma went up to Constantinople and obtained an audience with the emperor Theodosius. § 104

The emperor Theodosius grants him an audience.

1 such was the joy of the emperor at seeing Barsauma that he embraced and kissed him. “sir,” he said, “i have wanted to see you for a long time. i would have summoned you here to pray in our country and bless our City and its inhabitants, had i not been reluctant to burden you with a tiring journey. now that god has brought you here, i will gladly do everything you ask. Your word is my command.” 2 Then the emperor urged him to accept great gifts from him, but he declined them. realising that the holy man might be unwilling to accept secular objects, he had had vessels made for the altar of sacrifice. There were golden chalices and pyxes set with pearls and precious stones, including some very valuable gems. These choice vessels, together with veils of silk and purple of the finest quality, the emperor offered to Barsauma. ‘sir,’ he said, ‘here is a small blessing. Your servant offers it to you for god’s altar. i beg you, as your son, to accept it gladly. may it be used in your monastery for the worship of god!’ 3 now the most negligible object there was a small veil. This Barsauma accepted with the following words: “i should not like you to think that i have rejected your offering, so i have taken this, as the ‘firstfruits of the harvest’; i pray that your offering may be accepted in heaven as here on earth! These magnificent vessels are not suitable for monks. such things are only required by the finest of churches in the greatest of cities.” 4 When the emperor found him adamant in refusal, he was very much in awe of him. Barsauma rose in his esteem to the status of one of the apostles. “now, indeed,” he said, “i can believe all the great things i have heard about you. it is not just because you refuse my gifts that i believe. i am amazed at the perfection of your mind.” 5 as for Barsauma, he spoke with the emperor about the true faith and a god-fearing way of life. The emperor congratulated him on his piety. he and his courtiers expressed their admiration for the holy man and praised god for endowing the Christians with such wisdom. § 105

Theodosius urges him to be a father to all the bishops.

1 after this the emperor urged him to accept the office of archbishop of the great city of antioch, teaching everyone the true Way126 and appointing his disciples to the other episcopal sees.127 2 This was Barsauma’s reply: “an eagle’s element is air. it would drown if it exchanged this for the water of the sea, just as a fish, which has always lived in water, would die in the air. it is the same with a person who was reared on the open pastures. he cannot live in the midst of cultivated land. he thrives on the open pastures, as an eagle on the air. Conversely, the open pastures are difficult for a human being who has been reared on cultivated land, because he cannot endure the hardships of the wilderness.” 126. acts 9:2; cf. acts 11:26. 127. if this is true, it means that Theodosius ii was already looking for a successor to Domnus of antioch some months before the latter was deposed by the second Council of ephesus (august 449).

The Life of Barsauma

239

3 Then the emperor urged Barsauma to take care of the management of the Church and of the poor, even while remaining in the habit of a mourner, and to be a director for the bishops in the cities and for the judges in all regions. 4 The emperor took his own ring and gave it to Barsauma. “This ring which i give you now, sir,” he said, “is my own seal. When you write me a letter, seal it with my ring. By this i shall know it is from you!” in all simplicity of heart, Barsauma accepted the ring. The emperor did not explain that by giving it to him he was investing him with his own authority. § 106

The emperor writes a letter to the synod.

1 later, the emperor wrote a letter and sent copies to the whole empire of the romans, summoning all the bishops to ephesus in asia.128 2 The emperor Theodosius wrote another decree, which he sent to all the bishops when they had assembled, as follows:129 “Theodosius and Valentinian, the Christian emperors, to all the true bishops of the Catholic Church, warm greetings! i inform the holy synod of the priests of god that Barsauma, the monastic leader, has been chosen by god. You know, better than we do, that he is true in his faith and respectable in his orthodoxy; perfect in his good deeds and complete in the fear of god; luminous in knowledge and excellent in wisdom; full of zeal and complete in love; pure from corruption and free from the respect of persons; unsoiled by the love of mammon; a lover of mankind, and a servant of god, trusted by Christ with the stewardship of the apostles. What is more, great signs like those of the apostles are performed through his agency. 3 “moreover, i have tested him in many ways and have found him to be flawless. i begged him to become the next archbishop of antioch, but he has declined. i offered him great gifts, and he has refused them. at last i have persuaded him to become father and director to me, while remaining in the habit of a mourner, and to have the bishops and judges of my entire dominion at his command. let the judgment of the synod of bishops be decided according to the word of that slave of god! 4 “You should all be aware that i have given him my own ring, as father and director of the entire empire of the romans, set in authority over all our people, an authority exceeding that of Joseph over the land of egypt,130 that is to say, equal to my own and to that of the episcopal see of antioch. let the archimandrite Barsauma be a hearer at the synod of all the bishops!” 5 When the decree of the emperor had been read out within the synod of all the bishops, they all went out to greet Barsauma and welcome him with great gladness. § 107

The synod of Ephesus.

1 so a great and powerful synod sat down in the holy church of the city of ephesus. Barsauma, however, was not in the habit of sitting down, so the bishops placed a lectern at

128. Barrington atlas 1, i3; michael, Chron. 8.6 and 7; cf. gregory, Chron. eccl. 1.161–64. see also the anonymous syriac Chron. 846, ed. 212; tr. 162. 129. This differs considerably from the letters preserved in ACC i.47–48, 108–9. 130. Cf. gn 41:37–45.

240

The Life of Barsauma

the head of the synod. in front of him, on this lectern, they laid the gospel, resting on a cushion. some of them even took up this gospel and lifted it up to lower it onto his crown, so that he might be ordained a bishop by that same synod; but Barsauma declined the honor. 2 every word uttered at that synod of bishops was spoken at Barsauma’s behest. Bishop Dioscoros of alexandria the great and the bishop of Jerusalem, it is true, argued the need for certain ecclesiastical canons, but it was Barsauma who directed the whole performance. 3 after the synod had been dismissed and everyone had returned in peace to his country and his city, the emperor Theodosius wrote to Barsauma, summoning him to Constantinople. When he arrived, the emperor so rejoiced in his presence that he kept him with him for a few days, before letting him go down to antioch to convene another synod of bishops there to appoint a (new) bishop for that city.131 § 108 Theodosius writes an open letter about him. 1 While Barsauma set out by sea for antioch, Theodosius wrote a letter (σάκρα) and sent it with his officials overland. it was received in the city of antioch and in all the great cities. 2 it read as follows: “Theodosius and Valentinian, the Christian emperors, to the whole roman empire, much peace! all you who are under the authority of our majesty must know that we have asked Barsauma, the slave of Christ, to help us bear the weight of government in this time of confusion and of disturbance. 3 “it will be his responsibility to take care of the churches of Christ and to be both teacher of the orthodox faith and commander of the judges in every province! he shall see to it that judgment is given to the poor without corruption! let him be father to the bishops of the churches and executive (syriac: mdabbrono) of our majesty’s imperial authority! 4 “moreover, we decree that he be placed in authority over the bishops and the judges of our empire, to create and to abrogate, to establish and to overthrow. if any dare oppose him, he shall be punishable under the law. all who oppose Barsauma are opposed to god, because he is his own trusted slave.132 if god does this righteous man’s will, how much more do we, being sinners, owe him obedience and assent; and if god is not against him, how much less should we, being weak, resist him?” 5 When this imperial letter was read out in the great cities, many hurried to see Barsauma. Their first goal was to obtain his blessing, their second, to solve all kinds of problems. all those who were suffering from pains and diseases came to Christ’s champion (ἀθλητής), and he healed their cruel pains by the power of our redeemer and drove out many evil spirits. 6 all those who were oppressed and coerced by violence flocked to him from all countries; and each man’s case was judged with rectitude, with neither bribery, nor the iniquitous respect of persons. The poor and the oppressed rejoiced in his greatness, while plunderers and the grasping could only grind their teeth. The wicked were all struck down by him,

131. Domnus of antioch was deposed by the second synod of ephesus during its final session. 132. Cf. heb 3:5.

The Life of Barsauma

241

while the righteous prospered by his elevation.133 in short, the party of the apostates was put to shame by his faith, whereas the side of the true rejoiced in that upright man’s teaching. every day god in heaven was praised on his account, while his prayers brought about satan’s humiliation everywhere. § 109

The seventy-first sign. A general, cursed by him, breaks his bones in a fall and dies.

1 so after satan had seen that Barsauma had driven him out of many countries, he entered, envious and deceitful, the minds of the clergy (κληρικοί) of antioch. They paid a great bribe to a certain man, a pagan and a rebel, who was the general (στρατηλάτης) and resided there at that time.134 Those unprincipled men persuaded this rebel to make a stand against Barsauma. 2 That is how this pagan came to take it into his head to rebel against the emperor Theodosius also. he had the purple clothes and the crown of an emperor all ready for the moment when he would be clothed in majesty at antioch.135 3 Barsauma cursed him: “as our redeemer, the Christ whom i worship, is true to me, that rebel will fall and suffer two breakages.” a few days later, that pagan fell from his horse and broke his leg, dying shortly afterward. in this way Barsauma’s prediction that he would suffer “two breakages” came true. The second “breakage” was his death. § 110

The seventy-second sign. The sign is seen concerning his stoning.

1 around this time, Barsauma was standing near one of his disciples, and this man was looking at his head, when he had a vision of many people pelting Barsauma with rocks. it appeared to that disciple that a white stone, like a pebble from a river, coming from those people, struck him above his left eye and gave off a report. The disciple who saw this took hold of Barsauma by the head, kissed him on the place where the stone had struck him in his vision, and began to weep. 2 Barsauma was astonished and asked him: “What is this that you have done?” “i saw something miraculous,” he replied, “but i cannot explain it to you now.” This vision revealed what was going to happen to Barsauma later. from that time onward, that disciple was always thinking about this in private and wondering greatly at it.

133. Cf. Ps 72:4. 134. antioch was the residence of the magister militum per Orientem (στρατηλάτης τῆς ἕω). 135. honigmann (Le couvent de Barsauma, 20), citing françois nau (“Deux épisodes de l’histoire juive sous Théodose ii [423 et 438] d’après la Vie de Bars. auma le syrien,” Revue des études juives 93 [1927]: 202), identifies this man with Zeno (cf. John r. martindale, ed., Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, vol. 2 of 3 [4], A.D. 395–527 [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980], Zeno 6:1199f.), who was thought capable of revolt over the peace terms agreed with attila in 450, though he is attested as Patricius in october 451 (ACC XiX.7 = ACO ii.1.3, 1057 [greek; no latin version is extant]), so the words “a few days later” are disingenuous. Damascius knew a rumor that “the great general of the east,” an unnamed pagan, had died after breaking his leg in a fall from a horse and was thereby prevented from killing an emperor (summed up by Photius, Bibl. 1301 C).

242

The Life of Barsauma

3 The following day Barsauma arrived at a large and prosperous city, and all the people there came out to greet him. The judges and the leading men prostrated themselves before him. When he saw this and heard the uproar of the agitated multitude, he was deeply shaken, groaned bitterly, and shed copious tears. 4 Then he addressed his disciples: “if god does not want my avoidance of occasions of stumbling (lit. “my stumblings”) to be wiped out in his sight; and if Christ knows that my soul’s agonies will not be cheated of their reward, he will give me a sign of peace in my lifetime, and my eyes will see many people stoning me for the sake of the Crucified. only then will i be able to believe firmly that the reward of all my hardship is treasured up in his presence.” 5 now when the disciple who, the day before, had had the vision of his stoning heard him asking to be pelted with rocks, he groaned inwardly. Then he knew in his bones that what he had seen would come to pass. 6 Then, weeping, he spoke out loud: “Why have you made this request, master, which will ruin many people? only if paganism is reestablished in the world can this happen to you. our lord grants you everything you ask. We know that. so why have you asked him for something which may give joy to you, but will kill many? i have believed for some time that this will come to pass in truth; but woe to the whole world . . . !” 7 “Do you not know, my son,” Barsauma answered, “the pains which afflict me from within? When i saw emperors and empresses lying on the floor at my feet, i groaned and thought to myself, ‘it is in vain that my lord has so often set me free from the stumbling of my feet.’ Whenever i see multitudes doing worship in my presence, and watch judges bent double at my feet, i groan and my limbs shake. secretly, i am tormented by the thought that this very glory will deprive me of the reward of all my hardship. 8 “The prophets were persecuted, but i am respected; the apostles underwent stoning, but i receive congratulations; the martyrs were slaughtered, whereas i have been elevated; the confessors were reviled, whereas i am praised; and on the cross our lord was insulted by sinners and weak men, whereas i, a weak man and a sinner, am carried aloft in procession by all the world. 9 “our redeemer said—and he tells the truth—‘it is enough for the servant to be like his lord, and for the disciple to be like his master.’136 so if i were really the slave of Christ, what was done to his slaves and to him would have been done to me. 10 “at the end our lord may well say to me: ‘What fine deeds you have done in my service! instead of doing your duty, which was to worship me, you brought emperors to your feet, though it was no part of their duty to worship you. instead of doing what they ought, which was to praise me as their lord, even judges and lords have praised you. instead of doing what is right, which is to love me, the whole world loves you more than is right. You may have left your family home for my sake, but now both rich and poor offer you their houses. You may have served me as a slave his master, but now both slave and free are at your service.’ ” 11 “i am very much afraid of that utterance of our lord: ‘many will say to me on that day: “lord, lord, open up for us! after all, it was in your name that we ate and drank. it was

136. mt 10:25.

The Life of Barsauma

243

in your name that we prophesied. it was in your name that we performed miracles. it was in your name that we drove out demons.”’ But he will answer: ‘i do not know you.’137 12 “another thing our lord said in his gospel-teaching frightens me, too: ‘You will come to a bad end, scribes and Pharisees, for your hypocrisy! You appear to the world as righteous men, but inside you are full of greed and evil.’138 ‘You resemble whitewashed sepulchres, white on the outside, on the inside full only of filth!’139 ‘You will come to a bad end, scribes and Pharisees, for your hypocrisy! You swallow up the homes of widows on the pretext of lengthening your prayers! Your punishment will be the greater for it.’140 13 “it comes down to this, my children.141 Those who herd swine in humble obscurity have the better part.”142 14 he was evidently distressed, and all his disciples, hearing, felt the same distress and began to weep downheartedly. 15 as for Barsauma, he made up his mind to go down and visit the king of Persia. he planned to demolish the temple of the fire which he worships, insult his majesty, strike the magians, revile the pagans, and so provoke him to have him killed. 16 now Barsauma had gone down to Persia on an earlier occasion with the same idea. he had actually reviled the magians and struck the pagans, but no one had laid a finger on him. fear and trembling had fallen on them. everyone had been afraid to speak in his presence. § 111

Certain unprincipled men write a false report on him.

1 now he frustrated certain unprincipled men who lived at that time and they drew up the following false report and sent it to the emperor Theodosius. 2 “This criminal impostor Barsauma, to whom Your majesty has entrusted the entire roman empire, eats and drinks great quantities of meat and wine and has his hair cut in the style of a cleric. his head may be covered with the great habit (σχῆμα) of a mourner, but he is a hypocrite.” 3 “he claims that he does not sit down, while in fact he lies on soft cloth all night long. he claims not to accept gold from anyone, while in fact the silver and gold taken by the judges in bribes and seized from the poor fills many storehouses, and all of these belong to him.” 4 When this wicked report was presented to the emperor, he was astonished at their audacity and shocked by the injustice of their words; for he realized that it was a false accusation. § 112

Barsauma goes up to Constantinople a second time.

1 now Barsauma had certain friends who were great men in the empire. These men sent urgently to him in the east, telling him to come with all haste to Constantinople,

137. mt 7:22f., amplified. 138. Cf. mt 23:29. 139. mt 23:27. 140. mt 23:14; mk 12:40; lk 20:47. 141. something apparently alluding to 2 Cor 1:18 has been omitted here. The transmitted text makes no sense. 142. Cf. lk 15:11–32.

244

The Life of Barsauma

because of the report which had been published. When Barsauma received this letter from his friends, he promptly went up to the imperial City and obtained an audience with the emperor Theodosius. 2 When the emperor saw him, he was so glad that he ran to meet him and embraced and kissed him. in doing so, he laid his hand on his hair and, feeling it, laughed with delight. “Dirty liars!” he shouted. “Curse all oppressors and slanderers! shame on those who accuse such a true man!” 3 Then the emperor addressed his slaves: “Those liars wrote in their report that the hair of Barsauma’s head had been cut. But we can see with our own eyes that it is twisted into plaits of three strands143 from his head right down to his heels. Who would believe slander, rather than the evidence of his own eyesight?” § 113

The second imperial letter and the death of Theodosius.

1 The emperor sat down again and wrote a second letter (σάκρα), more important than the first, with a view to sending it to every district. it was about piety, Barsauma, and the true faith in Christ. 2 now the good times and the bad times are determined from the beginning. each of them will be fulfilled at the date which has been assigned to it. night succeeds day at the appointed hour, and winter follows summer in due season. in the same way, times of rejoicing and of peace are followed by times of hardship and chastisement. all times are destined to give way to others. accordingly, the emperor Theodosius died at a time of peace, because a time of hardship was due to begin very soon. But woe to him who brings on the evil!144 good will come again, according to scripture, and blessed is he who brings it on! 3 so it was with Josiah, king of Judah, who was more zealous for the faith than any other king. at a time when he was filled with zeal and faith, god said to him, “You have fulfilled my Will in every respect and have given satisfaction in my sight. i have loved you as i did your father, David.” 4 “it is not that i have despised you, or that i have rejected your prayer. But i see that the time for the chastisement of my people israel is approaching fast. for this reason i am gathering you to your fathers in peace, so that you will not see the evil which i am going to bring upon my people israel.”145 so Josiah was gathered to his family, and only then did evil come upon the sons of israel. § 114

The reign of Marcian.

1 in the days of the emperor Theodosius utter peace had reigned in the churches of Christ, but now the “time of trial” was due to begin. This was why Theodosius died at this juncture, while faith still reigned on earth. his successor was marcian, under whom it was revealed what was meant by “the time of trial” of which all the prophets speak.

143. The mss read “doubled on three times,” probably a corruption occasioned by the rarity of the syriac words originally used here for “twisted into plaits” and “strands.” 144. Cf. mt 26:24. 145. 2 Kgs 22f.

The Life of Barsauma

245

2 for not one of the true scriptures is devoid of evidence concerning this; and i wish i could comment on them all and demonstrate the relevance of certain passages to the present “time of trial.” But i have no leisure for that. i must press on toward the conclusion of Barsauma’s story. 3 now the emperor marcian adopted the policy of establishing that heresy which was originally called after simon the magician, then after Paul of samosata, the bishop of antioch, and, later still, after nestorius, bishop of the imperial City in the days of the emperor Theodosius.146 4 Because of this heresy nestorius was anathematized by the (first) synod of ephesus and exiled to the inner oasis.147 5 having fallen into this evil way of thinking, marcian commanded a host of bishops to attend a synod. it was a long time since nestorius had been sent into exile.148 But he was still alive, so marcian invited him, too. 6 on receiving the emperor’s letter, nestorius was struck by the angel of the lord. his tongue was paralyzed and became infested with maggots, his face was devastated, and he died.149 § 115

The bishops accuse him falsely.

1 The emperor wanted to summon Barsauma to the synod; but those bishops who followed the apostate nestorius prostrated themselves before marcian and the empress and urged them not to invite him. They feared him greatly, knowing that if he came, their apostasy would not be accepted. 2 in their cunning those deceitful bishops addressed the emperor and his consort as follows: “This Barsauma, who has the reputation of a righteous man, is in fact a leader of wizards and magians. his ‘great signs and miracles’ are feats of sorcery; and it is by enchantments that he casts out evil spirits. his immoderate doctrine is a pack of magian lies. if he comes to your synod, his magic spells will defeat both us and you.” 3 When the emperor and his consort heard this, they conceived a great fear of Barsauma and abandoned their intention of inviting him. instead, they looked askance at him and hated him with all their hearts.150 § 116 The synod of Chalcedon. 1 The synod was held at Chalcedon in Bithynia. as soon as the bishops went into session, they leaned toward the very heresy which they had rejected in the reign of Theodosius.

146. Cf. acts 8:9–24; CTh 16.5.66; John rufus, Plerophoriae 20, 42 [442]; V. Petri Iberi 76. 147. The great oasis, also called ἡ ἄνω Ὄασις, is in libya, ca. 300 km west of egyptian Thebes. The mss have “asia” for “oasis,” but see socrates, Eccl. hist. 7.34. 148. in 435. 149. Zachariah rhetor (Eccl. hist. 3.1, 1483–13) adds that this was a punishment for blasphemy against mary, the mother of Jesus. see also John rufus, Plerophoriae 36, 84f. [484f.] (referring to Timothy of alexandria’s lost Ecclesiastical History); V. Nestorii 24f.; eutychius 1033 B; severus, Synods 5151–3 [51] ; michael, Chron. 8.10. 150. michael, Chron. 8.10.9f.

246

The Life of Barsauma

They could see that marcian and his consort leaned toward this evil way of thinking and, to ingratiate themselves with them, made a volte-face, accepting the false doctrine of the two natures. 2 “nature” (syriac: kyōnō) is a name for something created. no Person of the Divinity is called a “nature,” because he is considered to be of the absolute essence (syriac: ītūtō, abstract noun derived from īt, “to exist”). every creature is called a “nature,” because it has been created (syriac: ettkīn, passive of akkīn, cognate with the noun kyōnō); whereas one who is god is called an absolute Being (syriac: ītyō), because he exists absolutely (syriac: ītaw, verb cognate with the nouns ītūtō and ītyō). it is not written that Christ was created, but that everything was created (syriac: mkōn, passive participle of akkīn) by him.151 This Christ therefore, who created (syriac: akkīn) everything, cannot be called a “nature,” because it is written concerning him that whoever accepts his testimony confirms that he is truly god.152 3 so again he (John the evangelist), in speaking about the same Christ, our redeemer, said that the father has confirmed that the son of man is truly god. so again, it has been said that “Christ is the god of all, to whom be praises and blessings forever and ever, amen!”153 4 however, all of those bishops knew that the doctrine of the two natures is anathema; for it is written that “we have seen the glory of Christ, as of the only one (syriac: īh. īdoyo) who (comes) from the father.”154 Those who use the appellation of the two natures cannot call Christ “single,” because they say that there are two natures (in him), perfect god and perfect human being. 5 no one whose tongue confesses this has any part or inheritance in the only son. The one only son cannot be called “two natures.” When god bore witness from heaven concerning his son while he was being baptized in the Jordan, he did not say: “These are my sons and my Beloved ones,” as (one) who (speaks of) two. god, speaking from heaven, implied that he was one.155 6 now not all of those bishops who were assembled in the city of Chalcedon actually strayed from the faith, but (only) a few of them. all the rest held fast to the truth privately in their minds, but because they were afraid of the emperor, they wanted to ingratiate themselves with him. They feared human authority more than that of god. 7 Their case is comparable with what is written in the gospel: “many of the leaders of the Jews believed in Jesus, but were afraid, because of their fellow leaders, to confess him openly.”156 for they (too) loved praise from human beings more than praise from god.157 8 The following prophetic utterance was fulfilled by those hypocritical bishops: god has stood up in the assembly of the angels; from among the angels will he give judgment. 151. Cf. Jn 1:3. 152. Jn 3:33. 153. Cf. 1 Pt 4:11, which actually reads (translating from the syriac): “that god might be glorified in everything that you do through Jesus Christ, to whom belong praise and honor forever and ever, amen.” 154. Jn 1:14. 155. mt 3:17; mk 1:11; lk 3:22. 156. Jn 3:1–21; 7:12f. 157. Cf. Jn 3:19.

The Life of Barsauma

247

for how long will you give evil judgment and respect the persons of wicked men?158 for i said: You are gods and all of you are sons of the most high. nevertheless you shall die like human beings; and fall like one of the princes.159 9 another inspired scripture was also fulfilled by those priests who turned aside from the Truth: “They have all turned aside with one accord”160 and earned contempt. god will scatter the bones of those who ingratiate themselves with human beings. They have been put to shame—161 —because god has despised them. § 117 Dioscorus, the bishop of Alexandria. 1 now Dioscorus, the bishop of alexandria the great, was not afraid of the emperor’s authority and did not accept the contemptible doctrine of the apostates. Then he walked out of that wicked synod; and some other bishops walked out after him. The empress went out with many people in the night; and she came and prostrated herself at the feet of Dioscorus to make him agree to her will and to that of her husband. 2 The empress said to Dioscorus: “accept the petition of your servant and do your daughter’s will! for i am your servant and your daughter and all that i possess is yours.” But Barsauma said to her: “Call me neither master, nor father! i am not your father any more than you are my daughter! What you possess is not mine! You have no fellowship with me, because you have left the Way of Truth and have followed the false teaching. That way lies darkness!” 3 The empress Pulcheria tried with many other words to persuade Dioscorus, but he was adamant. in the end she resorted to a threat: “if you will not be persuaded, we shall take away your throne!” Dioscorus replied: “You may take away that wooden throne, but you cannot take away the throne which Christ has established for me in heaven.”162 4 When the empress heard this, she went back home with a deep grievance. shortly afterward, Dioscorus was sent into exile. he remained there for the rest of his life and died in exile. he departed from the world at a good age and was buried with honor.163 § 118

Mari, the bishop of Qāra (?)164 in Arabia.

1 now Bishop mari, (of Qāra?) in arabia, had also suffered at this time. Putting on the seal of the faith, this holy man stood up among the bishops while they were in session and asked: “What has this assembly of devils done?”

158. 159. 160. 161. 162. 163. 164.

Ps 82:1f. Ps 82:6f. Cf. Ps 53:3. Cf. Ps 53:5. Cf. lk 22:28–30. This chapter is closely related to V. Dioscori 10, 5511–568. The second consonant may have been D or Z, not R: all three variants are attested.

248

The Life of Barsauma

2 The apostates were greatly troubled and ground their teeth at him. They threw a cloak around the holy man’s neck and, dragging him into the middle, began kicking him in the stomach, until he spat blood and began to vomit excrement. They went on abusing him like this until he seemed to have no life left in him, then threw him into the street for dead. 3 after a while, however, he recovered, went back in, and, standing in the middle of the assembly, cried out again: “What has this assembly of devils done?” 4 again they threw a cloak around his neck to drag him with and beat him up even worse than the first time. now mari was an old man, but by dint of fasting and prayer he had stayed strong, for he had forsworn, among other foods, bread, wine, and oil. nevertheless, those bishops dragged him around and tormented him, then threw him into prison. 5 When night came, they took him out of jail and left him outside the city. mari later went to rome, where he departed from the world and was buried by the Christians. § 119

Marcian sends out a great army because of the division (occasioned by Chalcedon).

1 at this time of unrest, a roman army, sent by the emperor, slaughtered at least thirty thousand in alexandria. all of these died as Confessors. 2 marcian sent another army to Jerusalem. Those who were slaughtered in the region of Palestine in those days were about three thousand five hundred, most of whom were priests. They, too, died for Christ. 3 others were exiled, imprisoned, deprived of their income, driven from their monasteries, expelled from their regions, or made strangers to their kin-groups; yet others fled to the wilderness, or were forced to take refuge in another country. all these, too, were Confessors of Christ’s Cross. 4 as for Barsauma, by word and by deed he was making a greater effort than anyone else, teaching people everywhere not to obey the emperor’s command, nor to accept the apostates’ words, nor to turn aside from the true faith, nor to call the only (syriac: īh. īdoyo) son165 “two natures,” nor to posit a division in the one true son; nor to deny the crucifixion of the lord Christ, who is true god from true god, the son of the essence (syriac: ītūto) of his father, to whom be praise and honor forever and ever, amen! § 120

The bishops slander him.

1 now those bishops who had fallen away from the true faith were afraid that Barsauma would turn people everywhere against the false doctrine of the two natures. They said to one another: “What can we do? To sin is human. We strayed from the true Way out of fear of the emperor’s authority. What we have written, whether well or badly, we have written.166 2 “What we have done, whether sinfully or justly, we have done. if we admit to the people that we were wrong to sign, the imperial couple will persecute us. if we are silent and discreet, the monk Barsauma will expose us. if we allow him to live, our crime will not remain a secret for long. he is going to go around telling everyone what we have put our

165. Jn 1:14. 166. Cf. Jn 19:22.

The Life of Barsauma

249

names to. he is going to write letters exposing our deed to men in distant countries, too. The people obey him. Us they pelt with stones! 3 “What is more, he is on his way to greater rome, where he is going to tell the emperor Valentinian, who is going to listen to him and send a force to burn us alive. This emperor, marcian, is feeble; he will not be able to save us from death. Come, then! let us think of a way to kill Barsauma, before he kills us all!”167 4 for these reasons the bishops were suspicious of Barsauma and began to hate him. every day, in the presence of the emperor marcian and his consort, they slandered him; and they spoke against him in the presence of high officials, bringing accusations against him, framing him with malicious indictments, imputing great sins to him. 5 They told lies against him and blamed him for their own crimes. They smeared him with their own repulsiveness. Whatever they themselves were in the habit of doing, they began to say that Barsauma did the same. 6 They even attributed to him the hateful doctrine which they had embraced. They sent liars to preach in churches and in front of the crowds, speaking against him in the people’s hearing. They brought deceitful witnesses into the assemblies and the streets to give false witness against him everywhere. 7 Where they saw that the doctrine of the two natures was accepted, they, too, confessed two and called Barsauma an apostate, “because (they said) he refuses to accept the doctrine of the two natures.” But again, where they saw that the two natures were not accepted, they slandered him, saying that it was he that taught the two. 8 Where they saw that people denied the crucifixion of the son, they said: “Barsauma has departed from the truth. he blasphemously claims that the son of god was crucified.” Then again, where they saw that people confessed that it was the son of god who died, they accused him falsely, saying: “Barsauma teaches that the man who was crucified was not the son of god.” 9 Where they saw that people received nestorius, they used to say, to appease them: “This apostate Barsauma refuses to accept the holy nestorius.” Then again, where there were people who anathematized nestorius, they used slanderously to say: “This liar Barsauma teaches the doctrine of nestorius.” 10 They did this to make everyone hate Barsauma, accusing him besides of many crimes, so as to scandalize the people. i cannot write down in this book the many accusations which they made against him. There are too many to be counted; and some of them are too offensive to be read out in the people’s hearing. 11 But mark my words! Because they have gone so far as to accuse him, they themselves are going to be put on trial. Their testimony is going to be exposed as false in front of Christ’s throne. § 121

The emperor Marcian orders his arrest.

1 now the emperor marcian and his wife were troubled and angry in the extreme. marcian sent an order, full of menace, to a certain count (κόμης) who had been created for the entrance to the sea, telling him to arrest Barsauma and bring him to the City. 167. Cf. michael, Chron. 8.14; gregory, Chron. eccl. 1.179–82.

250

The Life of Barsauma

2 The slanderers had been telling the imperial couple: “if you leave Barsauma alive, he will go up to rome and get the emperor Valentinian to send and cut off your heads and throw us into the sea. if the leading men of the City make a stand to support you, Valentinian will start an all-out war and burn your city down.” 3 it was because of their fear of the romans that marcian and his wife tried to get Barsauma into their palace. in their stupidity they thought that if only he would come to them, fear would make him weak and he would acquiesce in their way of thinking. § 122

The seventy-third sign. A demon is expelled from a Roman soldier.

1 When the command of the emperor reached to the count of the straits (syriac: est.īno; cf. greek: τῶν στενῶν), he took a large number of soldiers and went out to arrest Barsauma. he caught up with him near a city called Tenedos.168 2 now the soldiers whom the emperor had commanded to arrest Barsauma did not know him by sight. one of them, a strongly built man who tended to violence, had long been possessed by a demon. all of a sudden this man’s hands and feet were locked together. he stood there, like one crucified or turned into a wooden post, and was on the point of being suffocated by that demon. 3 Barsauma came up and blew on him; immediately the devil left him to make its escape from Barsauma. Then that soldier fell down and performed an act of worship in front of god’s slave.169 he was healed and experienced no more harm. 4 When the soldiers saw what had happened, they fell down on their faces in front of Christ’s champion (ἀθλητής). many other signs also were performed in those days by his agency. Then they brought him to the imperial City. § 123

The seventy-fourth sign. A magistrate, cursed by him, dies.

1 The emperor marcian commanded his magistrate to have Barsauma brought in to his presence with haste and not to let any of his disciples enter with him, so that he might be disoriented and frightened by the numerous people there. 2 so Barsauma entered the law court on his own; the attendants seized him and stood him in front of the magistrate. 3 Then the magistrate began to speak harshly and menacingly. “You are Barsauma,” he said, “the wizard and false guide; the emperor’s enemy; the murderer of bishops.” 4 Barsauma said: “i am Barsauma, the Christian. i have not abandoned the Word of truth, nor denied Christ, as you have. i am no enemy of believing emperors, no murderer of true priests. i am, however, the enemy of rebellious emperors, a hater of unbelieving priests. i have never killed a bishop. The lord, however, will kill a priest who denies the truth.”

168. We later come across a count of the Black sea straits at abydos, on the hellespont (fiona K. haarer, Anastasius I: Politics and Empire in the Late Roman World, arCa, Classical and medieval Texts, Papers and monographs 46 [Cambridge: f. Cairns, 2006], 218–19); it may be that Barsauma was arrested near the main town on the island of Tenedos. This would explain why he was thought to be on his way to rome (§ 121.2). 169. Cf. heb 3:5.

The Life of Barsauma

251

5 When the magistrate heard this, he was was deeply disturbed and very angry. he shouted out loud: “By my office, by the emperor’s life, by the honor of his throne, i swear that i will throw you into a place where there is no water.” 6 at this, Barsauma laughed. he wagged his head and, using freedom of speech, cried: “hah! You have forsworn yourself and the emperor’s authority! Your oath cannot be kept! You can throw me into a place where there is no water. But god, the lord of sources, will be there. When he sees that water is needed for my use, either he will cause it to rain, or he will make water well up out of the earth for me. 7 “Throw me, if you can, into a place where there is no god! Then, perhaps, you will be able to keep your oath.” 8 The magistrate retorted: “i can do just that! i can cast you into a place where there is no god.” “There is no place that is empty of god,” said Barsauma, “except for the chair on which you sit and the throne of your wicked emperor! and if you throw me into one of those two places, god will come to that place also for my sake.” 9 This made the magistrate even angrier. he threatened Barsauma: “i shall cut you up into small pieces and throw your flesh out, limb by limb.” 10 at this, Barsauma clasped his hands together behind him, turned his head to one side, and showed the judge his throat, shouting: “o basest of judges and most shameful of men, for all your threats and those of your emperor, who is just as base and shameful, do not you have even the smallest blade with which to cut this soft throat of mine and rid yourself of me?” 11 The magistrate was astonished. he groaned inwardly, too much afraid to answer. 12 Warming to his theme, Barsauma continued: “evil and rebellious slave! in your arrogance you make threats and lord it over me. Your master, the emperor marcian, did not dare to remain seated in my presence. as for you, not only do you remain seated in my presence, you even presume to judge me! as Christ, whom i serve, is true to me, you shall not judge any other case in this world! The case of god’s slave,170 Barsauma, will be your last!” 13 This pronouncement struck terror into the magistrate’s heart. he shook at the joints. he stood up from the bench on which he was sitting and ran to the emperor marcian, trembling all over. 14 he undid his belt and laid it down in front of the emperor. “here in your presence,” he said, “i lay down all the honors which you have given me. i am going to die. Barsauma has killed me.” “What has he done to you?” asked the emperor. 15 “he put a curse on me,” the magistrate replied, “and killed me. The curse is like a sharp arrow, which has struck my heart and broken it. i have this sharp, stabbing pain in my heart. i can feel my soul fluttering to make her escape from my body.” 16 The magistrate sent the following instructions to his wife: “go quickly to Barsauma and plead with him on my behalf! i am dying!” 17 his wife hurried out to find Barsauma; her slaves went in ahead of her and told him: “my lord, your servant and daughter is outside. she has come to worship you.” 18 hearing this, he gave them the following message for her: “Do not put yourself to the trouble of coming to see me, because i shall not receive you! You would do better to prepare a funeral for your husband!” 170. Cf. heb 3:5.

252

The Life of Barsauma

19 But she insisted and sent word to him again: “i know that, if Your grace so desires, my husband will not die. if he is healed and retains his post, he will do your bidding.” 20 here is Barsauma’s reply: “You had better believe what i say: your husband will never judge another case. Very soon his soul will be taken, because he has ingratiated himself with wickedness by persecuting Christ, who is going swiftly to take him out of the world to stop him oppressing his servants.” 21 That very day the magistrate became ill and was confined to his bed; he died a few days later. § 124

The emperor Marcian sends a prefect to him.

1 Then the emperor was very much afraid. he summoned the highest prefect (syriac: [h]ūparko rabbo; cf. greek: μέγιστος ὕπαρχος) and said: “Come, go to the archimandrite (syriac: rīš dayro) Barsauma and say to him in my name: ‘The emperor urges you to take what you want from the treasury, both for your own honor and for the provision of your monastery, and return in peace and honor to your monastery! no one will do you any harm. only do not put a curse on me!’” 2 now that prefect feared the lord; moreover, he loved and honored the Christians. he came to see Barsauma in the place where he was imprisoned and went into his room in faith, bending his head before him and asking for his peace. he did not presume to sit down in his presence, but remained standing, listening to his teaching. 3 after listening to him for a long time, he said: “my lord, the imperial couple implore Your grace not to put a curse on them. instead, they beg Your holiness to accept from them gifts for your monastery and rations of corn for your brethren. You may return in honor and peace to your monastery!” 4 at this, Barsauma asked: “Did not the emperor Theodosius urge me to accept gifts from him, altar-vessels at the least, and i refused?” The prefect answered: “i know you did.” 5 Then Barsauma said: “if the emperor Theodosius, who was true in his faith and whom i loved, urged me to accept altar-vessels and i refused, how should i accept secular gifts from this marcian, my enemy, who denies the truth and whom i hate?” 6 When the prefect heard this, he inclined his head before the champion (ἀθλητής) and received his blessing. Then he went to the emperor and told him everything. The emperor insisted: “go and urge the archimandrite Barsauma to leave the City. if he stays here for many days, he will turn the people against me. i am afraid there is going to be sedition (syriac: est.asīn = στάσις) against me in the City.’” 7 The prefect replied: “You sent me the first time with the brief to use persuasion. i cannot now go with the brief to use compulsion. i am afraid he will be angry with me and curse me. Use another messenger! if i go to see him, it will be to receive his blessing, that he might pray for me.” § 125

Marcian sends a Patricius, meaning “a father of emperors,” to him.

1 Then the emperor marcian spoke with one of his great men, whose title was “father of emperors.” This man had earlier been a friend of Barsauma’s. The emperor said to him: “Come, go to your friend, Barsauma, and tell him not to curse me! advise him to leave the City and return with honor to his monastery!”

The Life of Barsauma

253

2 so the man spoke with Barsauma and begged him to accept many gifts; but he refused everything. so he simply implored him to depart from the City. § 126

The seventy-fifth sign. Fire breaks out in the City.

1 Barsauma accepted his petition. But he was not yet quite gone when fire broke out in the City. it quickly turned into a great conflagration and destroyed many houses and great palaces. 2 now there was a certain believing woman there, who sent the following message to Barsauma: “my lord, have mercy on me! Pray for me and my house and all that i have! The flames have come right up to my house and there is no one who can help me.” 3 Barsauma put some water into a cauldron, blessed it, made the sign of the cross over it in Christ’s name and sent it to that woman with this message: “Take this water in faith and sprinkle it on the door and walls of your house!” she carried out these instructions. 4 The fire now surrounded her house, and the blaze was lapping against its walls. Yet the flames did not take hold of the house; not even a straw of it was destroyed. The fire burned down all of the houses which surrounded it. great buildings swayed and fell to the ground. But that house in the middle remained standing, unshaken. 5 The woman came and fell at his feet, thanking him in the sight of all. § 127

He leaves the Imperial City.

1 Then Barsauma departed from the imperial City and came to nicomedia, where he stayed throughout that winter, under military guard. he persuaded a great number of people there not to depart from the true faith, as preached by the blessed apostles and confirmed by the three hundred and eighteen bishops who were assembled in the city of nicaea in the days of the true and righteous emperor Constantine, who deserves a good commemoration. 2 god’s true slave171 preached this same faith and divine doctrine wherever he went; accordingly, he taught it at nicomedia. he also performed other signs there, but i have not written them down in this book. § 128

The seventy-sixth sign. The empress Pulcheria, cursed by him, dies.

1 The following summer, the emperor marcian sent a command to Barsauma to return in peace to his monastery. The empress also wrote him a letter: “We begged and urged you to be our father and instructor, but you refused. so we command you now to return in peace to your monastery. We shall not come to you, nor you to us. We will have nothing to do with you, because you hate us.” 2 Barsauma sent back the following message: “i am the slave of the Crucified. it is Christ’s will that i go in peace to my native country. it is not at your command that i go to my monastery, nor am i dismissed from this place at the bidding of your husband. it is the will of the living god and of his son.”

171. Cf. heb 3:5.

254

The Life of Barsauma

3 “as the Crucified, whom you have doubted and denied, is true to me, you will vacate your throne. only then, in all serenity, shall i enter my monastery.” 4 Then Barsauma left nicomedia for syria. he was about a day’s journey from his monastery when a messenger, who had followed him on swift horses,172 caught up with him and, leaping to the ground, prostrated himself in front of him. 5 “my lord,” he said, “god has fulfilled your prediction! The empress who hated you fell into a cruel torment, which ended with her swallowing her own tongue and dying in agony.” at this, Barsauma lifted his eyes to heaven, praising Christ and weeping great tears. § 129

The seventy-seventh sign. A man is bitten by a mad dog and healed by the sign of the cross.

1 only then did he reach his monastery, where a great number of people had come out to welcome him back. he was teaching these when, from a certain village, they brought him a man who had been bitten by a mad dog and was now possessed by many demons. These left the man the moment Barsauma rebuked them, and he went home, whole and rejoicing. § 130 Many signs. 1 The possessed arrived from all directions, and their demons were exorcised. signs of various kinds occurred. many sick people were healed by his prayers. § 131

The seventy-eighth sign. He sends his disciple to stop a fatal contagion.

1 a few days later, in a certain famous town, a contagious disease appeared. some people from that town went to see him and tried to persuade him to go and pray there and prevent the disease from spreading. But he summoned instead the disciple who had seen those astonishing apparitions and addressed him as follows. 2 “my son, it is written in the law of moses that, when a plague suddenly broke out in the wilderness in the camp of the sons of israel, the lord told moses to say to his brother, aaron: ‘fill your censer with burning coals and incense and run through the camp toward the plague!’ holding the censer in his hand, aaron stood between the dead and the living, and the angel of death, seeing him, turned away from the people.173 3 “so take the oil of prayer in your hand and go at a run to the town where this contagious disease has broken out. enter the church and pray there, burning incense and offering the oblations. Then our lord will make the disease turn away from that community likewise!” That disciple did as Barsauma told him; and from that moment the spread of the disease was halted. § 132

The seventy-ninth sign. A plague is halted by his prayers.

1 a few days later they came to Barsauma from another settlement, saying: “my lord, have pity on us and come and pray in our village! a virulent plague has broken out in it!” This time, Barsauma granted their request and went back with them. 172. Cf. hb 1:8. 173. nm 16:46–48.

The Life of Barsauma

255

2 They were about to enter the area of the threshing-floors when some men from that settlement appeared, bearing a man on a bier. he was still just breathing. They set him down in front of him and, grasping him by the hand, he raised him up in Christ’s name before their very eyes. 3 now a priest from another place happened to be present. This man, influenced by the bishops who hated Barsauma, had his doubts about him. But when he saw him raising up a man who had been given up for dead, he was amazed and afraid. 4 out loud, he said: “now i know that you have not strayed from the faith. i acknowledge that everything the bishops say about you is a downright lie. everyone who maligns you and blasphemes against your true doctrine will meet with his fate. even his memory will be damned.” That priest hurried about, witnessing to everyone who crossed his path. as for Barsauma, he prayed in that village, and the plague was halted. § 133 The bishops send a deceitful letter. 1 The bishops wrote a letter of excommunication and sent it to that district so that no one would associate with him. all the inhabitants of the district were assembled in one place when the letter arrived and was read out in their hearing. it contained terrible menaces and laid many curses on anyone who refused. it threatened such a person with punishment by the emperor himself and made scandalous accusations against Barsauma. 2 Then one of the leading men of that country said: “my brothers, you all know that i have an only son who fell ill and was close to death. We had given him up for dead. With the help of others, i bore him to Barsauma’s monastery. i wanted to bury him there. not for a moment did i imagine he could come back to life. 3 “But when Barsauma prayed over him, my dead son came back to life and fully recovered his health. here he is, standing in front of you. let the bishops who despise Barsauma come here and pray over one dead goat-kid! if they can bring even that back to life, i will reject Barsauma and accept them! my family and i, at least, will not be separated from Christ’s slave.’ 4 This speech was followed by an almighty clamor. “We will not deny god’s slave!”174 the people shouted. “We will not desert the Christ of our country! We will not doubt the one who repairs the spiritual defenses of our region! We are not to be separated from the one who keeps harm from our land! We will not be cut off from the physician of our diseases! We will not be prevented from associating with the healer of our sick!” § 134

The eightieth sign. A deacon with rigid fingers.

1 This was the answer to the bishops’ letter. When they received it, they were at a loss what to do about Barsauma. Then they sent an order that all those in the villages and the monasteries who were in holy orders should assemble in one place and anathematize him.

174. Cf. heb 3:5.

256

The Life of Barsauma

2 a certain deacon, who was also an archimandrite, took up his stance in the middle of the assembly and shouted out: “fathers, listen!”—and he stretched out his right hand so that everyone could see it. 3 “many of you know the facts. These fingers were once rigid. i could not bring them together. But then i showed them to Barsauma. he made the sign of the cross over them in Christ’s name (lit. “sealed them in the name of the Crucified”). Then he covered them with spittle from his mouth. immediately, i found they were no longer rigid. i could move them. They were healed! This happened in the sight of some here present today. 4 “This i tell you: so long as i have this healthy hand before my eyes, i refuse to say ‘anathema to the man who healed it!’ anyone who denies him will be denied in turn! anyone who says ‘anathema!’ is anathema himself!” 5 every man who heard this was ashamed, and not one presumed to answer him back. Then they refrained from the thing they had intended. § 135 The eighty-first sign. A paralyzed woman regains her health. 1 The following day, many people were standing there, disputing with him, when some men from a distant country appeared, carrying a woman of about thirty years, whose hands and feet had been paralyzed and rigid since childhood. Barsauma made the sign of the cross over her hands and over legs, and she was healed. Those disputing with him hung their heads in shame and slunk away. § 136 The eighty-second sign. A devil speaks through a woman against those who deny the truth. 1 another day, when others were standing there, disputing with him, a woman from a distant country, who was possessed by a devil, appeared, haranguing loudly long before she reached him. 2 “These days,” it was her voice, but it was the devil who was speaking, “the bishops are our friends. now it is you, Barsauma, burned and desiccated as you are, who are our greatest enemy, the persecutor of our race. The great zeal of your fiery nature bound me with a band of fire. it has brought me from a distant country to be punished in your presence. Were it not for your prayers, we would now be in control everywhere.” 3 “Those bishops who have become our brothers and intimates opened the door for us to enter into the world. But you, impudent man, covered with bruises from the stones that have been thrown at you, refuse to keep quiet and even persist in trying to lock that door, the door of apostasy, which the bishops, our friends, have opened for us.” 4 When those disputing with him heard the unclean devil’s speech, they prostrated themselves in front of Barsauma, each sobbing on his own account. § 137 The eighty-third sign. A consecrated woman,175 possessed by an impure devil. 1 another day, many people were assembled around him, many of whom were arguing that the Body of Christ was like a human body. 175. syriac: b(r)ath qyomo, “a daughter of the covenant.”

The Life of Barsauma

257

2 all of a sudden, an impure demon shouted out, using the voice of a certain woman: “i am satan, the spiritual master of the left hand. i am he that tempted Christ, the son of god, in the wilderness. i am he that dared to say to him: ‘fall down and worship me!’176 his compulsion has bound me and brought me from the abysses of the earth, that i might be judicially tortured by the burning seal of Barsauma, the victim of persecution. it is under compulsion that i declare the truth, although i hate it. 3 “if the body of Jesus is like a human body, which human being has broken his body and given it as food to his friends? and if the blood of the Crucified, the firstborn, is like the blood of the human race, what human blood can atone for sin?”177 The devil said this. 4 Then he added the following: “i am no herald of the truth, but its enemy. it is the compulsion of the Crucified which is forcing me to tell the truth.” When those who had been disputing with him heard this they were even more ashamed. § 138

The eighty-fourth sign. A man possessed by an evil spirit is healed.

1 another day, when many were arguing with him, some Cappadocians appeared, bringing a man possessed by an evil spirit, who was covered with suppurating sores from his toenails to his scalp. he was an appalling sight. 2 Barsauma made the sign of the cross over him with spittle from his mouth. The pus ceased to flow, and the sores dried up and became like fish-scales, with raw flesh visible underneath. These scales gradually worked loose and fell to the ground, and the man’s skin was healed. 3 Those who had been disputing with Barsauma were put to shame in the eyes of all bystanders; if they continued to disagree with him, it was only out of envy. § 139 The eighty-fifth sign. The hand and tongue of a preacher who maligns him are disabled. 1 now there was a priest in another district who was a preacher with a large following. he preached in the churches and the monasteries and taught many the text of the scriptures. he had been a friend of Barsauma’s, but he had suddenly changed his mind and now disapproved of him. 2 all at once he fell ill and took to his bed. his friends said: “You ought not to disapprove of god’s slave.178 We know he holds to the truth and you yourself bear witness that he has not departed from the true faith. everyone acknowledges that it is the bishops who are in the wrong.” 3 The moment he stretched out his hand to speak blasphemy and opened his mouth to malign Barsauma, his hand withered, the flesh of his arm fell away, and his tongue split and dropped out. soon afterward he died in agony. many were afraid, but the apostates were confused by their error.179 176. 177. 178. 179.

Cf. mt 4:9; lk 4:7. Cf. Barhebraeus, Candelabra 4.6.2–3 (ed. 234f., 242f.). Cf. heb 3:5. There is wordplay in the original between doh. līn, “afraid,” and dlīh. īn, “confused.”

258

The Life of Barsauma § 140

The eighty-sixth sign. A priest who blasphemes against him dies.

1 satan’s spirit entered a village-priest, filling him with error, so that he blasphemed. he put a wooden bar in the door of a monastery and shouted: “i am going to destroy this monastery, because the wicked Barsauma has prayed here and made it unclean.” 2 This priest was still maligning Barsauma when the angel of the lord suddenly struck him and threw him over. a burning fire fell on him and began to torment him. “i beg of you, Barsauma,” he screamed, “have mercy on me and give me relief from this torment!” 3 Then, still screaming, he addressed his fellow villagers: “i beg of you all on my knees, show mercy toward me in my predicament! let one of you go quickly to the oratory he made in such and such a place, take some of the earth on which he stood and bring it to me! i shall take refuge in Barsauma and be delivered from this hell in which i am burning.” 4 But though the priest implored them, the people would not listen. They took pleasure in his distress and refused to send anyone to that place. not long afterward he gave up the ghost. § 141

The eighty-seventh sign. Another priest maligns him and dies for it.

1 There was a priest-monk whom all the bishops loved—his maternal uncle was a wellknown chorepiscopus—whom they authorized to incite the masses to persecute Barsauma. 2 one sunday, when that priest was offering up the oblation in the church of a certain town. he took up his stance on the dais in front of the altar, lifted up the pyx, and made this proclamation to the people: “anathema to anyone who associates with the apostate Barsauma!” 3 The whole congregation answered with a single voice: “anathema to you and to all your associates!” Then they walked out of the church-building, leaving him alone. after a little time he came out into the street and shouted at the elders: “may god do thus unto me and more, if i do not clap chains and collars around your necks and take you to antioch!” 4 “as the Christ whom Barsauma preaches is true to us,” replied those elders, “you will never see antioch again!” furious, the priest mounted his she-mule and left that town. 5 he had not gone far when the wrath of god suddenly struck him. his neck-muscles collapsed, and his joints shook. The people of the first village he came to had to help him to dismount, and immediately he fell to the ground in agony. 6 now the priest of that village took pleasure in his distress, because he had been persecuted for his faith. he and his congregation all gave thanks to god, because they were on Barsauma’s side. 7 The priest who was in torment implored the other to send a message to Barsauma, begging him to forgive his offense and pray for his life. But that village-priest replied: “as the lord lives, i will not send him any message, nor will i ask him to pray for you!” 8 The priest who was in agony now turned to the people: “i beg of you, have mercy on me! let someone go to my lord Barsauma! i know that mercy dwells in him. he does not return evil for enmity. send someone to him. The moment he prays for me, i shall recover, i know it! Then i shall repay you for your respect. i will give the man who goes to him whatever he wants.” 9 But the priest of that village said to his people: “anathema to anyone who goes and pleads with Barsauma on behalf of this man! leave the blasphemer to die an evil death, the

The Life of Barsauma

259

recompense of his blasphemy!” after suffering great torments, that priest gave up the ghost. § 142

Many signs.

1 Too many signs were performed at this time for them all to be written down here. We have written down those which are edifying with respect to the true faith. § 143

The deceitful letters which the apostates sent to him.

1 seeing that all their efforts had ended in shameful failure, the apostates now plotted to have Barsauma assassinated. They instructed one of their friends, a bishop, to kill him in an ambush. having mustered about two thousand men on the mountain, this man concealed them beside a powerful river which flowed between cliffs too steep to climb. 2 Then, as a blind, they wrote the following letter, insincerely offering peace to Barsauma: “To the teacher of the truth and preacher of the faith, the shepherd of human beings and father of us all and master of the mourners, Barsauma, most peaceful greetings! 3 “sir, we thank the chosen status of your victorious person that the sin that we committed in error has been revealed to us. We acknowledge all the evil we have done. now we understand and know in truth that you teach the way of justice, no error. But we are afraid to come to Your holiness, in case the inhabitants of the country come out and stone us. 4 “so, my lord, we beg of Your holiness that Your grace might take the trouble to come to us, so that we may confess our sins in your presence and give our assent to the truth of your faith.” 5 When Barsauma received this letter, he was delighted, for the deceit of those damned men had not yet been revealed to him. § 144

A disciple of his has a vision.

1 one of his disciples, though, had received a revelation concerning their deceit one night. The lord showed that disciple everything that the apostates were planning to do. he told two of his friends about the trap which the enemy had prepared, but he concealed it from his master. 2 When Barsauma went to meet those liars, the bishop and his confidants had hidden sticks behind the altar, intending to take him into the church alone and kill him there. 3 “if we can trick him into entering the church,” they told each other, “we can beat him with the sticks. if he is unwilling to enter the church alone, the men we have concealed can come and kill him openly.” This had also been shown to that disciple in every detail. 4 Those deceivers sent another long petition to Barsauma. at the same time certain respectable persons, instructed by them, gave him a message: “my lord, leave your brethren where they are and come to us on your own, secretly! let just one disciple come with you! To begin with, we want to hold secret conference with you inside the church. afterward we shall confess openly to our offense in front of the people.” 5 Barsauma himself was willing to do this; but the disciple who knew the secret intentions of the deceivers said to him in front of those men: “master, every day, as our father, you give the orders. Today, i give them. stay here in the open with the brethren! i shall go to them secretly!”

260

The Life of Barsauma

6 he said this because he knew it was him and his master they wanted to kill. But they began to make dire threats against him, because he opposed them more than all the rest. The people who had been sent refused to take him, so they went back and Barsauma stayed with the brethren. 7 Then they sent others more important than the first, bringing a long petition. The disciple who knew their secrets answered them as before. They sent as many as ten times; and each time the disciple who had learned their intentions dismissed them with the same words as the first time. They were furious with him, but they did not know what to say. 8 in the end, in great anger, they said: “it is you that will not allow your master to make peace in the land! You are to blame for the discord between the parties today.” “Your love is enmity to god,” that disciple retorted. “Your insincere peace will rebound on you like a conflagration of wrath.” 9 The reason why the disciple did not reveal the apostates’ secrets to Barsauma is that he knew his master would leap at the chance of dying, if he knew that they wanted to kill him. 10 for some time that disciple had known how glad he would have been to die for the truth’s sake. Barsauma had already hungered and thirsted for this in his youth; now, as an old man, he still yearned for it. This was why he hid from him the knowledge which had been revealed to him. § 145

The apostates stone him, but he does not die.

1 in the end, the apostates’ messengers came to Barsauma and said: “Dismiss the brethren who are with you! let them go wherever they will! as for you, whether you want to or not, you are going to die now.” he thought they were joking; but they swore by all that is holy that he was going to be killed that same day: “any minute now your blood is going to be shed.” 2 at this, inwardly, he jumped for joy. his mind was delighted. his face lit up and seemed to flash like lightning. Yes, he was filled with gladness and praised Christ. he lifted up his eyes to heaven in thanksgiving and made the following speech to the brethren who were with him. 3 “my sons, you know that it was for an opportunity like this that i went down to Persia long ago. But there among the pagans no one would kill me.180 it was for this that i traveled in distant countries, but nowhere did i meet with this opportunity. 4 “But now that, god willing, i have found what i have been looking for, i ought indeed to give thanks to our lord, who has fulfilled the desire of my heart. What i went in quest of with so much trouble, he has given me with no effort today. 5 “so now, whoever wishes to follow me, let him follow with joy; and whoever wishes to go, let him go in peace! only, my sons, see that you take up no sticks and throw no stones! Curse no one! Do not indulge in insults! Do not resist the murderers! Do not argue! Do just what you see me do!” 6 having said this, he ran toward the murderers with a spring in his step. his shining face was like that of one jostling to enter at the gate of the Kingdom. 7 his persecutors hurriedly selected a place in which to stone him. They all came and stood on the bank of a stream, where there were many pebbles. They had brought with them 180. Cf. § 110.9.

The Life of Barsauma

261

the men who had been lying in wait in the ravine and many others. These stood on one side of the stream, while he approached from the other side. 8 many women and children were watching from a distance with tears in their eyes, shouting: “You, who won a great victory on the cross, help your worshipper, Barsauma!” 9 Barsauma had reached the edge of the water and was in a hurry to cross over quickly, so that those people could stone him; for he thought his last hour had come. 10 But that disciple did not allow him to go in among them. he overtook him at a run and, stopping on the bank of the stream, made the following speech. 11 “Turn round, master! look eastward and pray! Bless the sons who are following you, like a flock of lambs running into the hands of the slaughterer! Bless your other sons, who are far away from here! Do not deprive them of their reward for the trials they have borne with you! remember that they have rejected their families and committed themselves to you! 12 “Bless this district, in which you grew up! remember how the local people always bowed down to you! give absolution to these people who are going to stone you! Pay off the debts of your friend, stephen!181 forgive everyone who has ever offended against you! release from his bond everyone you have put under a ban!” 13 The disciple who said this was the same as had had the vision of his master being stoned. he realized now that all this had come to pass to fulfill his prayer “that his eyes might see the people stoning him.” 14 as for Barsauma, turning round to look at the disciples who were following him, he said: “see to it, my sons, that you do as i told you! let no curse or insult come out of your mouths! Take up neither stone nor stick against any man! Do exactly as you see me do!” 15 he was still saying this when the men who were going to stone him called to his disciples: “leave your master to die! flee! it is him we want to kill!” and they set about stoning him. 16 now the stones which they threw at him were smooth river pebbles. one man threw a white stone which hit Barsauma above his left eye, giving off a loud report. Those who heard it thought that it had broken his skull. But all of a sudden something just like that stone came out of the air and struck the man who had thrown it and broke his skull, devastating his face and pushing his left eye out of its socket.182 17 his disciple was standing in front of him with his right arm around his neck. now he embraced him and spoke to him: “By the life of the Crucified one, whom you love, let this much be enough for you! 18 “it is not the men who are stoning you. They are feeble. it is our lord, making your wish come true. Today he has fulfilled the request you made some time ago, that he allow you to see the people stoning you. master, that if you die at the hands of these sinners, this country will be devastated by your assassination. i know it! fire will come down from heaven and consume it, as it consumed sodom together with all its inhabitants.” 19 But Barsauma said to his disciple: “let them stone me, my son!” he was unwilling to let him go; but Barsauma clasped his hands behind him and bowed deeply in front of

181. Cf. acts 6f. 182. Cf. ex 21:24; Dt 32:35; mt 5:38f.; rom 12:19.

262

The Life of Barsauma

those who were stoning him, so his disciples did exactly the same, as did the other religious who had come to watch. most of the stones, however, were thrown at him. § 146

The eighty-eighth sign.

1 The disciple who had his right hand around Barsauma’s neck stretched out his other hand against the men who were stoning him. many stones struck his hand, his face, his head, and his shoulders. all those stones fell down and piled up around them, until a great pile had accumulated there. now that disciple did not feel the pain of a single one of those stones, nor was a single scratch to be seen on his body.183 § 147

The eighty-ninth sign.

1 suddenly, an east wind, or something like it, got up and bowled those stoning Barsauma right over. “run!” they called to one another; and, terrified, they began to flee. § 148

The ninetieth sign. A devil speaks through a woman and puts the apostates to shame.

1 When the people had run away and put a distance between themselves and that place, he straightened up from his bowing position and moved upward to a vantage point, beautiful, splendid, and high. others were making their way to the place in which he had been stoned. 2 among these was a woman seated on a she-mule, who had an unclean devil in her. This woman dismounted, took some soil from that place, and threw it up in the air. Then she began to shout with her hands clasped behind her and walked backward up the mountainside. 3 The men who had been stoning Barsauma watched her from a distance, while she climbed up toward him and shouted at them: “You men who have stoned Barsauma, it is you i am talking to! This is the entrance by which you can go in before the Throne of Christ, whom you have denied!” 4 The people, hearing this, began to weep; and their groans went up to heaven. They began to climb toward him from all sides. There on the mountain he spoke to them of many things.184 5 his enemies held their position until evening. But at sunset dark clouds covered the sky, and it began to rain heavily. 6 god put fear into the hearts of those who had stoned him, and they began to say to one another: “let us flee from Barsauma this very minute! if we stay here tonight, he will come over and kill us!” Then and there those apostates got up, too much afraid to have their supper. 7 The river rushed down wildly between steep slopes, surrounded by many rocky cliffs, with thorny bushes around it which were entangled with one another; and they fled along its course. it was so steep and wild that a man could not easily walk down it, even in the daytime.

183. Cf. § 93. 184. Cf. mt 5:1f.

The Life of Barsauma

263

8 all that night they were in difficulties. it was pitch-dark, and there was a torrential rainstorm. They thought Barsauma was pursuing them, and fled headlong in fear and trepidation, tripping up and falling on the rocks. all night long they were getting tied up in knots and encountering difficulties on the steep mountainsides, their bodies scratched by the thorns, their faces bruised by the rocks. Yet there was no one pursuing them! 9 When morning came, they began to clamber on hands and knees up the steep slopes as fast as they could. With difficulty they managed to escape into open country, where there was no impediment. Then they looked up and saw a large number of women walking along a path. 10 Taking those women for Barsauma’s disciples, they were scared right out of their wits. so they retreated and went back down to the riverbank, getting tied up in knots on the steep slopes in their trepidation. 11 now the bishop who was with them was an old man. shaking and trembling with fear, he lamented his fate in the following words: “Woe to you, my white hairs! Woe to you, my darling eyes!” 12 They kept on the move, yet there was no one pursuing them. The curse which was written long ago in the law had come true for them. if you doubt the lord your god,185 you will totter and sway186 when confronted by “a shaking leaf.”187 “You will go out one way against your enemy and flee seven ways before him.”188 You will shudder and “you will flee, although there is no one pursuing you.”189 Your enemy will be glad, because you scream and flee. 13 That is exactly what happened to those people who doubted the lord Christ. They did not stop in their flight until they reached samosata. There they found seven bishops holding a meeting about this business. 14 The bishop who was with those who had run away told his fellow bishops everything that had happened, ending with a warning: “look out, Barsauma is on his way here to attack you!” hearing this, those bishops left samosata at once! § 149

The ninety-first sign. A chorepiscopus who threatens Barsauma is struck by the Lord and dies.

1 at samosata there was a chorepiscopus, a proud and vainglorious man. arrogance possessed him—it would be his downfall in the end. he spoke to those bishops in the hearing of all: “so are we all going to run away from one man and becoming the laughing stock of the land, because we are afraid of him? he has no more than thirty or forty disciples with him.

185. 186. 187. 188. 189.

Cf. Dt 28:15. Cf. Ps 62:3. lv 26:36. Dt 28:25. lv 26:17.

264

The Life of Barsauma

2 “i am going to get a mob together, go out to meet Barsauma, and take him prisoner. i am going to put a collar around his throat and chains on the necks of his disciples and i am going to drag them all the way back here.” 3 That very minute the scoundrel got up and drummed up everyone in the city. he sent for the brethren from the monasteries and the villagers. Bearing cudgels, clubs, and swords, this mob then marched against Barsauma. 4 as for him, he had not even considered going down to the city of samosata against them, but had gone back to his beloved monastery, where he stayed for a few days. 5 While that chorepiscopus was on his way—he was marching across a broad plain, which was filled from edge to edge by the mob that he had mustered—about twenty of Barsauma’s disciples went out to a certain mountain, from which they could watch that mob marching against them. 6 The bad chorepiscopus looked up and saw those brethren standing on the mountain opposite. in his eyes they appeared as a great army. “Who are those,” he asked, “standing on the mountain?” Those who were marching with him answered: “Barsauma has sent messengers in all directions and brought together a great army to help him.” 7 hearing this, his heart shook, for all his insolence, and his bones knocked together. he nearly died of fear. he vomited, loosed his bowels, and was in mental torment. 8 “i implore you,” he said, “take me back to the rear! my soul is in the throes of departure!” his underclothes were soiled, and his outer garment was filthy with the contents of his stomach. 9 They had to put him on a donkey to retreat. he got back to samosata, but died after a long agony. § 150

The ninety-second sign. A tribune offers to kill him.

1 There was an isaurian tribune, a professional soldier, with whom Barsauma’s enemies exchanged oaths and drew up a legal contract. “if you use cunning to kill Barsauma,” they promised, “each of us will give you one hundred darics. on top of that, we guarantee that you will receive ten darics from every bishop in the roman empire. What is more, you will prove yourself a friend to the emperor and he will promote you.” 2 The tribune accepted these conditions and swore to kill Barsauma. But when he went home and told his wife about it, she groaned. Trembling, she struck herself on the breast and on the face, then lifted up her voice and wept. 3 “Woe is me! Woe to my sons! Woe to the bones of my fathers in their graves!” she implored her husband with bitter tears not to do this thing, but he would not yield. 4 “as my Creator lives, who breathed life into me,” said she at last, “if you do this deed, i am going to take my two infant sons and throw myself with them into the middle of the euphrates. not only the innocent Barsauma’s blood, but mine and my sons’, too, will be on your head on Judgment Day.” not even at this did he relent. 5 That night, in his sleep, he had the following vision. he was on his way to kill Barsauma. he looked up and saw him standing in a high and impregnable castle, clothed in garments whiter than snow and brighter than the sun. on his head was a crown, and his countenance was more dazzling than any lightning. Choirs of angels in white stood around him as ministers.

The Life of Barsauma

265

6 Barsauma challenged him: “Come, climb up to us, insolent and audacious man!” on the instant he fell from his horse, and the palm of his right hand was dislocated. 7 Barsauma challenged him again: “get up! Come, climb up to us, importunate and wild-natured man!” again he fell. This time his right foot was dislocated at the ankle. 8 Barsauma challenged him for the third time: “get up, self-hater, and come to us!” he got up and climbed up to him, but Barsauma struck him with his hand on his cheek. “get up and greet me! Be a peace-loving man, instead of an agent of aggression!” 9 at this point he awoke with a start. immediately, he realized that his right wrist and his right ankle were dislocated and quivering. The thing he had seen in his sleep was waking reality. from the moment he awoke he was in excruciating pain. 10 he called his slaves. “Quick!” he said. “Tell Barsauma’s enemies to come here!” “how have i ever injured you?” he protested, when they came. “Why should i die in agony, like this, because of you wicked apostates? Your denial of Christ has killed me!” 11 There and then he told them all what he had seen and showed them his painful dislocated joints. his wife was delighted; she stretched out her hands toward heaven and praised Christ. 12 “go to Barsauma!” he implored her, with awe-inspiring oaths. “fall down at his feet and beg him to heal my injuries!” she went gladly and journeyed on foot, now walking, now running, for about seventy-five miles,190 day and night. When she reached Barsauma she fell down at his feet and wept convulsively. Then she told him everything that had happened. 13 he prayed, praised Christ, took oil, blessed it, and gave it to her. “go home quickly,” he said, “and anoint your husband with this oil! he will recover his health and live, in the name of our lord Jesus Christ.” she went home swiftly and anointed her husband with that oil. he was healed and lived to believe in Christ. § 151

The ninety-third sign. A bishop who threatens to kill him is struck by God and dies.

1 There was a bishop of Cyrrhus, to whom the emperor marcian had subordinated all the bishops, giving him authority over all the east.191 This man threatened to kill Barsauma and swore powerful oaths that he would not allow him to live. 2 he sent to the cities, inviting soldiers, wrote to the villages and monasteries, and mustered a great mob. he prepared an expedition to kill Barsauma and all his supporters. many advised him to desist, but he swore that he would carry out his threat. 3 This rebel was on the point of setting out when the angel of the lord struck him suddenly. he fell to the ground. The lord had delivered him to an evil spirit, which tortured him. he proceeded to bite off his tongue and spit it out. his servants took him inside and hid him, ashamed to let this be seen. Tormented and disfigured by the devil, he died. 4 They intended to bury him in the martyrium of saint Dionysius.192 But while they were bearing the corpse in procession along the street, saint Dionysius appeared openly to 190. 111 km. 191. Theodoret became bishop of Cyrrhus in 423; was exiled in 449 and reinstated in 451; and died in the 460s. 192. Cf. Theodoret, Hist. rel. 2.21.

266

The Life of Barsauma

the people, standing inside his chapel and shouting: “Do not bring that disfigured man in here! i will not have him buried with me!” There ensued a sudden general commotion; so they bore the damned man’s corpse back along the street and buried him elsewhere. § 152

The bishops write a letter about him to Marcian.

1 When Barsauma’s enemies saw him covered in glory, themselves in shame in every region, they realized they were no match for him. Then they assembled in number and took counsel how to get rid of him. 2 This assembly sent the following mendacious letter to the emperor: “from all the bishops and judges of the roman empire and from all Your majesty’s subjects to the glorious throne of your honor, respectful greetings! 3 “We write to inform Your powerful and zealous majesty concerning the rebel Barsauma. This man is in rebellion against your fierce authority. he insults Your majesty and exalts himself above Your majesty’s rule. moreover, he blasphemes against Your majesty’s faith and teaches paganism everywhere. 4 “having mustered thousands of brigands and tens of thousands of bandits, he has subdued and occupied great swathes of land belonging to Your majesty and there he withholds the corn supply from our lord, the emperor, and our lady, the empress. 5 “he has driven bishops from their churches and forced judges to leave their cities. he has dismissed the original priests from their altars of sacrifice and appointed other priests, although he is no bishop. 6 “he has collected much gold and filled great treasuries. Unless Your majesty takes action, he is going to subjugate many regions. 7 “We therefore petition Your majesty’s fearsome authority to adopt the same zeal as your servants and send a great force of soldiers against him. let the great force he has mustered be destroyed and let the rebel himself be killed!’ 8 When marcian received this letter full of lies, he was angered and disturbed. he sent an open letter (σάκρα) to the great cities and dispatched a great force of soldiers to arrest Barsauma and bring him to the capital. all this came to Barsauma’s ears. he was delighted to hear of it and gave thanks to Christ. § 153

He curses the emperor Marcian.

1 exultant, he made a solemn statement: “i have an unshakable faith in Christ that marcian’s authority will never be imposed on me. he will not see my face in this world, nor i his hateful visage. i place my hope in the victorious Crucified, whom i, at least, have not denied, that my death is going to rid this world of marcian.” 2 after this, he was moved to climb up to his monastery. five miles193 away from his monastery, he stopped to spend the night somewhere. 3 While his companions ate supper, one of his disciples felt compelled by god to make an announcement in front of Barsauma and in the hearing of all: “our master is soon to be taken away from us. of this you may be sure!” This was a prophetic inspiration.

193. 7.5 km.

The Life of Barsauma § 154

267

He has a vision concerning his illness.

1 The following morning, before daybreak, Barsauma climbed up to his cave. a great multitude from all countries was assembled to see him. he continued to live for about two weeks in his monastery. 2 one morning, Barsauma spoke openly in front of his disciples: “last night i saw the angel of the lord. he stood there in front of me and said: ‘Barsauma, i am here to give you advance intelligence of what is going to happen. You are going to fall ill; and that illness is going to be worse than any you have had.’” 3 he had hardly finished speaking when his soul grew heavy and he fell ill. so began the grievous illness by which he would depart from this world. 4 he summoned one of his disciples, a man filled with zeal for the faith and rich in wisdom and eloquence, and said to him: “Come, my son! let me send you into Persia! go also to armenia! Visit the bishops of those countries and persuade them to defend the faith! 5 “Today, in case i die before you return, i am going to give you the blessing which fathers and masters ought to give their sons at their death; and you, likewise, are going to pray for me, as disciples and sons are obliged to pray for their fathers!” 6 he spoke with him on many subjects, then gave him his blessing and dismissed him. at peace, that disciple set off for Persia. § 155

The ninety-fourth sign. A great earthquake occurs before his death.

1 a few days later the time came for the champion (ἀθλητής) to be crowned. Before he died, god gave a terrible sign of the pain of that parting. 2 a great earthquake occurred in the country where he dwelt, and the catastrophe made itself felt in all the surrounding region. The foundations of the earth shook. mountains quaked, hills shuddered, crags crumbled. Buildings tottered, corbels fell off, upper stories collapsed. Palaces were knocked down, villages ruined, their owners buried. The earth groaned, the hills complained, and a mournful noise between a roar and a moan could be heard from the belly of the earth and from the very foundations of the mountains. 3 The earth continually groaned and tottered in this way for several days before his death; and the groaning lingered in that region for six months after his death. only then did the earth’s din fall still, as though bringing closure to a period of mourning. 4 Just as the children of israel performed a ritual of mourning after the death of the zealous Josiah,194 so the northern region made lamentation on a vast scale for the death of Barsauma. it was not only people that grieved; the earth herself was in mourning. even before human beings articulated their grief, the mountains and the hills were grieving. § 156

The ninety-fifth sign. An angel speaks with him and tells him about his coming death.

1 That night the angel of the lord appeared to him: “Barsauma, what i am going to tell you is the truth: four days from now our lord Jesus Christ is going to send me to bring you to him. give instructions concerning your monastery and all your desires!”195 194. 2 Kgs 23:30; cf. 2 Kgs 23:1–25. 195. Cf. mt 1:20; 2:13, 19.

268

The Life of Barsauma § 157

His death.

1 The following morning, Barsauma summoned the brethren who lived with him and told them what the angel had said. They began to weep and to mourn, but Barsauma said: “Whether you like it or not, i am going to leave you.” 2 Then he began to speak astonishing words which came straight from god. Day and night, four days long, he gave instructions. Then he blessed everyone by rank, according to precedence. 3 afterward he lay down on a bed and said: “farewell! Pray for me!” he crossed himself, praised Christ, and gave up his spirit to god. so he fell peacefully asleep and rested from his labor. 4 Barsauma departed from this world on the first of february and was buried on the third. § 158

The ninety-sixth sign. A pillar of fire appears when he yields his spirit to Christ.

1 now the time when he gave up his spirit to Christ was about the fourth hour of the night. at that very hour, a certain priest, who happened to be standing with a number of people some way off and looking that way, saw a bright light flashing from heaven and a pillar of fire descending to earth and alighting on Barsauma’s head. 2 others also, who were further away from there, saw the pillar of fire at that hour. as for that priest who was standing and watching, he discerned the truth and announced to those who were with him: “at this very hour, Barsauma’s spirit is ascending to heaven.” 3 an old man, near the end of his life, looked out at that same moment and saw from afar that pillar of fire. he was one of the righteous, who dwelt in another country, six days’ journey from Barsauma’s monastery. having the gift of discernment, he, too, understood. 4 That pillar of fire remained above the monastery of Barsauma for a long time, then it was observed to recede into heaven. Barsauma’s spirit was taken up into heaven in the column of fire. 5 This miracle resembles that of the prophet elijah. a chariot of fire carried the body of the zealous and holy elijah up to heaven.196 The column of fire carried the spirit of the zealous and holy Barsauma up to heaven. elijah’s body was taken up, and his mantle was left among men as a blessing. Barsauma’s spirit went up, and his body remained with us as a blessing. 6 as for the emperor marcian, as soon as he heard of Barsauma’s death, he canceled the military expedition against him. § 159

The ninety-seventh sign. The emperor Marcian dies.

1 now because it was appropriate that this other thing should also happen and that the words spoken by Barsauma before he fell ill should come true—namely, “i hope, by the Crucified, whom i, at least, have not denied, that marcian is never going to impose his authority on me. he will not see my face, nor i his hateful visage”—everything turned out just as he had requested.

196. 2 Kgs 2:11–13.

The Life of Barsauma

269

2 moreover, it was necessary that what Barsauma had said before his death should also be fulfilled—namely, “as Christ is true to me, my death will get rid of marcian.” 3 for this reason the disciple who had been sent by Barsauma to Persia and armenia when he fell ill departed from armenia and arrived in syria at the time of the harvest. he went in and prayed in the place where Barsauma was buried and wept great tears there. 4 Then he left Barsauma’s monastery and set off on a journey. he went to the city of hemesa (h.ims.),197 which is opposite mount lebanon, and entered the place where the head of John the Baptist is entombed to pray. 5 The door of the niche where saint John’s head was kept was secured with iron locks; but when that disciple reached the door, it opened for him by god’s will. The disciple went in and put his face in front of John the Baptist’s head and wept tears of sorrow there. 6 Then he took a sheet of papyrus and a pot of ink and went and sat apart on his own. he wept into the pot and so mixed the ink with his tears. he took up a reed-pen and wrote the following on the sheet of papyrus. 7 “from so-and-so, a distressed, persecuted, exiled man, to you, my lord John, head of those who live in the wilderness, greeting! 8 “my lord, i hereby accuse marcian, my own persecutor, of confusing the true Way and of abandoning his faith in god. my lord, by the senior authority which you possess, please urge Christ, who loves you—you have been called ‘the friend of the Bridegroom’198— to have marcian’s authority taken away and given to another!” 9 he wrote these words and many more on the sheet of papyrus. included in the scroll was the name of Proterius, who had become bishop of alexandria the great, because at that time he was killing those who would not deny Christ, for he had killed more than thirty thousand Christians, both men and women. 10 also included were the names of other wicked people. at the end of the scroll he wrote: “my lord, i do not address my accusation to a dead man, nor do i apply for judgment to a skeleton or a corpse. i address my accusation to a man who is alive in Christ, and in whom dwells the life-giving spirit of holiness.” § 160

Saint John appears and speaks of Marcian’s death.

1 When the document had been concluded and sealed, the man who had written it took it and laid it on saint John’s head. Then he spent the night in that chapel. many were sleeping there. around midnight something like a man appeared to many, standing in the middle of the chapel and proclaiming at the top of its voice: “The emperor marcian is dead, because a Christian has brought an accusation against him.” 2 {so again there appeared (something) in the likeness of another man, who was holding that scroll and reading; and he was uttering death-threats against marcian, because he saw the disciple of Barsauma, who had written that letter.}199

197. Barrington atlas 68, C4. 198. Jn 3:29. 199. This section contradicts § 160.1 and 4, both of which say marcian is already dead.

270

The Life of Barsauma § 161

The disciple who wrote the note to the holy John has a vision.

1 saint John appeared as though dressed in clothes as white as the sun. he came and stood next to the man who had written the scroll, and revealed to him many things which were about to happen. 2 “Do not be distressed, or weep,” he told him, “but go to the place which i am going to tell you about. You will see, some people will come to that place and tell you about everything you wrote to me and give you the good news about the death of marcian and about the burning of Proterius of alexandria; and again, they will tell you of the others about whom you wrote to me.” 3 Then that disciple departed from the city of hemesa and went to the place he had been told about; and while he was standing there in prayer, behold, some people came up to him and told him the good news about the death of marcian;200 and they told him how Proterius had been burned in alexandria the great;201 and they told him what had happened to those others whose names were written in the scroll. 4 now these things truly happened in this way; and if there is anyone who is unwilling to accept them, he will have to answer for the blasphemy of his tongue! § 162

The ninety-eighth sign.

1 now it happened after this that a fatal contagion broke out in a certain country. The inhabitants of that country came and took the oil of prayer and the holy dust and oil from where Barsauma’s body was buried; and at the same time the contagion ceased to spread. § 163 The ninety-ninth sign. 1 There was a well-known man in a certain city, who had been tormented by satan for a long time. The man who was subject to this tribulation was of the same persuasion as the persecutors of Barsauma. 2 This man had a vision that he should go and pray beside Barsauma’s bones. he did so and was cured. Then the persecutors of Barsauma were put to shame and began, one by one, to repent inwardly. many of them went to that place, weeping and distressed. 3 many signs are performed today on Barsauma’s bones, and many sick people go to his resting place and are healed. Devils and evil spirits are cruelly tormented in his presence. § 164 [The First Colophon] 1 as for my incapable and insignificant person, the lord knows my name. may he pardon my sins! at a time when i was tried in many ways, i was compelled by overwhelming love to compose a memoir of the above events. But lest my narrative become burdensome to the audience by its length, i also left many other signs unwritten. moreover, what i have written is known not only to me but also to many others.

200. marcian died in January 457. 201. Proterius was patriarch of alexandria from 451 to 457. on his death, see evagrius, Eccl. hist. 2.8.

The Life of Barsauma

271

2 Whoever reads and believes, whoever hears and affirms, and whoever praises Christ for what he hears shall have a share in the exertions of Barsauma and a part, together with all those who are chosen, in the covenant of the righteous! 3 Whoever prays for me when he hears what i have written shall not pray to god in vain when he asks forgiveness for his sins! Whoever remembers me with affection when these words are read out loud shall be remembered by our lord Jesus Christ on the day of his second Coming202 and receive new life together with the upright and the righteous, now and always, forever and ever, amen! § 165 [The Second Colophon] 1 now it was the priest samuel who wrote down these acts (consisting) of the achievements of the champion (ἀθλητής) Barsauma. he was one of Barsauma’s first disciples. But all of us know that all these things have been written down in truth. 2 This same priest samuel also wrote many metrical homilies (mīmrē) and teachingsongs (madrošē) and sermons (tūrgomē) on the faith and on various subjects; and refutations of all superstitions (deh. loto); and a refutation of the Dyophysites; and fine commentaries on the scriptures. 3 as for us, slaves of Christ, who have concluded this book, we conjure you by almighty god, let no one dare to change even one of its excellent words! Whoever copies from this manuscript shall copy them out right down to this point! 4 may the grace of our lord and his mercy be on all of us, now and always, forever and ever, amen! [subscription in the oldest manuscript, of 1085] § 166 End of the story of Barsauma, the head of the mourners in the Northern Massif in the clime (κλίμα) of Syria. May his prayers be with us! Amen!

202. Cf. mt 24f.

biblio graphy

s o U r C e s : e D i T io n s a n D T r a n sl aT io n s

acoemetae. Les moines acémètes: Vies des saints Alexandre, Marcel et Jean Calybite. ed. and tr. Jean-marie Baguenard. spiritualité orientale 47. Béroles-en-mauges: abbaye de Bellefontaine, 1988. “le Vie ancienne de saint marcel l’acémète.” ed. gilbert Dagron. Analecta Bollandiana 86 (1968): 271–321. “The life of alexander akoimētos.” Tr. Daniel Caner. in Wandering, Begging Monks: Spiritual Authority and the Promotion of Monasticism in Late Antiquity, 249–80. The Transformation of the Classical heritage 33. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002. “The life of our holy father alexander.” Tr. elizabeth Theokritoff. Aram 3 (1991): 293–318. Vie d’Alexandre l’Acémète. ed. and tr. Émile de stoop. Po 6.5:641–706. Paris: firminDidot, 1911. Acta Martyrum et Sanctorum. Vol. 7, ed. Paul Bedjan. Paris and leipzig: otto harrassowitz, 1897. Acta Conciliorum Oecumenicorum [ACO]. Tomus Alter. Concilium Universale Chalcedonense. ed. eduard schwartz. Berlin and leipzig: de gruyter, 1933–38. The Acts of the Council of Chalcedon [ACC]. Tr. richard Price and michael gaddis. 3 vols. Translated Texts for historians 45. liverpool: liverpool University Press, 2005. Akten der ephesinischen Synode vom Jahre 449 syrisch mit Georg Hoffmanns deutscher Übersetzung und seinen Anmerkungen herausgegeben. ed. Johannes flemming. abhandlungen der Kaiserlichen gesellschaft der Wissenschaften in göttingen, philosophischhistorische Klasse 15. Berlin: Weidmann, 1917. 273

274

Bibliography

An Ancient Syriac Document, Purporting to Be the Record, in its Chief Features, of the Second Synod of Ephesus, and Disclosing Historical Matter ‘Interesting to the Church at Large.’ ed. samuel g. f. Perry. oxford: oxford University Press, 1867. The Second Synod of Ephesus, Together with Certain Extracts Relating to It, from Syriac Mss. Preserved in the British Museum. Tr. samuel g. f. Perry. Dartford: orient Press, 1881. antony the great. La vie d’Antoine. ed. and tr. gerard J. m. Bartelink. sources chrétiennes 400. Paris: Cerf, 1990. La vie primitive de S. Antoine conservée en syriaque. ed. and tr. rené Draguet. 2 vols. CsCo 417–418, scriptores syri 183–184. louvain: secrétariat du CorpussCo, 1980. athanasius. The Life of Antony and the Letter to Marcellinus. Tr. robert C. gregg. Classics of Western spirituality. mahwah, nJ: Paulist Press, 1980. S. Antonii Vitae, Versio sahidica. ed. and tr. gerard garitte. 2 vols. CsCo 117–118, scriptores Coptici 13–14. louvain: e Typographeo linguarum orientalium, 1949. avitus of Vienne. Opera qvae svpersvnt. ed. rudolf Peiper. monumenta germaniae historia 6.2. Berlin: Weidmann, 1883. Letters and Selected Prose. Tr. Danuta shanzer and ian Wood. Translated Texts for historians 38. liverpool: liverpool University Press, 2011. Barhebraeus. Chronicon Ecclesiasticum. ed. Jean-Baptiste abbeloos and tr. Thomas J. lamy. 3 vols. louvain: Peeters, 1872/77. Le candélabre du sanctuaire de Grégoire Abou’lfaradj, dit Barhebraeus: Quatrième base; De l’Incarnation. ed. and tr. Joseph Khoury. Po 31.1. Paris: firmin-Didot, 1964. Barsauma. “résumé de monographies syriaques.” ed. and tr. françois nau. Revue de l’Orient Chrétien 8 (1913): 270–76, 379–89; Revue de l’Orient Chrétien 9 (1914): 113–34, 278–89, 414–19. “Vie de Barsoma le syrien.” ed. and tr. sylvain grébaut. Revue de l’Orient Chrétien 13 (1908): 337–45; 14 (1909): 135–42, 264–75, 401–16. [Basil of Caesarea.] “The syriac history of Joseph: a new Translation and introduction.” Tr. Kristian s. heal. in Old Testament Pseudepigrapha: More Noncanonical Scriptures, ed. richard Bauckham et al., 1:85–120. grand rapids, mi: eerdmans, 2013. Chronicon ad annum Domini 846 pertinens. ed. e. W. Brooks. in Chronica Minora 2. CsCo scriptores syri iii.5. Paris: e Typographeo reipublicae, 1904. Chronicon Edessenum. ed. ignacio guidi. in Chronica Minora 1. CsCo scriptores syri iii.4. Paris: e Typographeo reipublicae, 1903. Codex Theodosianus. in Theodosiani libri XVI cum constitutionibus Sirmondianis, ed. Theodor mommsen and Paul m. meyer. Berlin: Weidmann, 1905. The Theodosian Code and Novels and the Sirmondian Constitutions. Tr. Clyde Pharr. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1952. Coleman-norton, Paul r., ed. Roman State and Christian Church: A Collection of Legal Documents to A.D. 535. 3 vols. london: s.P.C.K. london, 1966. Le commentaire Genèse-Exode 9,32 du manuscrit (olim) Diyarbakir 22. ed. lucas van rompay. CsCo 483–484, scriptores syri 205–206. louvain: secrétariat du CorpussCo, 1986.

Bibliography

275

Constantine Porphyrogenitus. The Book of Ceremonies. Tr. ann moffatt and maxeme Tall. 2 vols. Byzantina australiensia 18. Canberra: australian association for Byzantine studies, 2012. De administrando imperio. ed. gyula moravcsik and tr. romilly J. h. Jenkins. Dumbarton oaks Texts 1. rev. ed. Washington, DC: Dumbarton oaks, 1967. Cyril of scythopolis. Kyrillos von Skythopolis. ed. eduard schwartz. Texte und Untersuchungen zur geschichte der altchristlichen literatur 49.2. leipzig: J. C. hinrichs Verlag, 1939. The Lives of the Monks of Palestine. Tr. richard m. Price, with introduction and notes by John Binns. Cistercian studies 114. Kalamazoo, mi: Cistercian Publications, 1991. Damascius. The Philosophical History. ed. and tr. Polymnia athanassiadi. athens: apameia, 1999. Ps.-Dionysius of Tell-mahre. The Chronicle of Zuqnin, Parts III and IV, A.D. 488–775. Tr. amir harak. mediaeval sources in Translation 36. Toronto: Pontifical institute of mediaeval studies, 1999. Incerti auctoris chronicon pseudo-Dionysianum vulgo dictum. ed. Jean-Baptiste Chabot. Vol. 1. CsCo 121, scriptores syri 66. louvain: e Typographeo linguarum orientalium, 1949. Pseudo-Dionysius of Tel-Mahre, Chronicle Part III. Tr. Witold Witakowski. Translated Texts for historians 22. liverpool: liverpool University Press, 1996. The Documents from the Bar Kokhba Period in the Cave of Letters: Greek Papyri, Aramaic and Nabatean Signatures and Subscriptions. ed. naphtali lewis and Yigael Yadin. Judean Desert studies. Jerusalem: israel exploration society, 1989. ephrem the syrian. Des heiligen Ephraem des Syrers Sermones II. ed. and tr. edmund Beck. CsCo 311–312, scriptores syri 134–135. louvain: secrétariat du CorpussCo, 1970. Des heiligen Ephraem des Syrers Sermones IV. ed. and tr. edmund Beck. 2 vols. CsCo 334–335, scriptores syri 148–149. louvain: secrétariat du CorpussCo, 1973. Des heiligen Ephraem des Syrers Hymnen de Ieiunio. ed. and tr. edmund Beck. 2 vols. CsCo 246–247, scriptores syri 106–107. louvain: secrétariat du CorpussCo, 1964. Des heiligen Ephraem des Syrers Hymnen de Paradiso und Contra Julianum. ed. and tr. edmund Beck. CsCo 174–175, scriptores syri 78–79. louvain: secrétariat du CorpussCo, 1957. Ephraemi Syri Rabulae episcopi Edesseni Balaei aliorumque opera selecta. ed. Josephus J. overbeck. oxford: e Typographeo Clarendoniano, 1865. Histoire complète de Joseph par Sainte Ephrem. ed. Paul Bedjan. Paris and leipzig: otto harrassowitz, 1891. Saint Ephrem’s Commentary on Tatian’s Diatessaron: English Translation of Chester Beatty Syriac MS 709 with Introduction and Notes. Tr. Carmel mcCarthy. Journal of semitic studies supplement 2. oxford: oxford University Press, 1993. Sancti Ephraem Syri in Genesim et in Exodum Commentarii. ed. raymond-m. Tonneau. CsCo 152–153, scriptores syri 71–72. louvain: secrétariat du CorpussCo, 1954. St. Ephrem the Syrian, Selected Prose Works. Tr. e. g. mathews. The fathers of the Church 91. Washington, DC: Catholic University of america Press, 1994.

276

Bibliography

eusebius of Caesarea. Das Onomastikon der biblischen Ortsnamen. in Eusebius: Werke 3.1, ed. erich Klostermann. Die griechischen christlichen schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhunderte 11.1. leipzig: de gruyter, 1904. The Onomasticon of Eusebius Pamphili Compared with the Version of Jerome and Annotated. Tr. Carl U. Wolf. Washington, DC: Catholic University of america Press, 1971. evagrius scholasticus. The Ecclesiastical History of Evagrius with the Scholia. ed. Joseph Bidez and léon Parmentier. london: methuen, 1898. The Ecclesiastical History of Evagrius Scholasticus. Tr. michael Whitby. Translated Text for historians 33. liverpool: liverpool University Press, 2000. flavius Josephus. Jewish Antiquities. Vol. 2, Books 4–6. Trans. h. st. J. Thackeray and ralph marcus. loeb Classical library 490. Cambridge, ma: harvard University Press, 1930. The Latin Josephus. Vol. 1, Introduction and Text: The Antiquities, Books i-v. ed. franz Blatt. aarhus: Universitetsforlaget, 1958. gregory of nazianzus. Select Orations. Tr. martha Vinson. The fathers of the Church 107. Washington, DC: Catholic University of america Press, 2003. Historia Monachorum in Aegypto. ed. and tr. andré-Jean festugière. Brussels: société des Bollandistes, 1971. The Infancy Gospels of James and Thomas. Tr. ronald f. hock. santa rosa, Ca: Polebridge Press, 1995. isaac of antioch. A Homily on Solitaries, Hermits, and Mourners. ed. and tr. edward mathews. master’s thesis, Catholic University of america, 1987. Itinera Hierosolymitana: Saeculi iiii-viii. ed. Paul geyer. Csel 39. Prague, Vienna, and leipzig: f. Temsky, 1898. Jacob of serugh. Homiliae selectae Mar-Jacobi Sarugensis, Vol. 2, ed. Paul Bedjan. Paris and leipzig: otto harrassowitz, 1906. “Jacob of serug’s homily on symeon the stylite.” Tr. susan a. harvey. in Ascetic Behavior in Greco-Roman Antiquity: A Sourcebook, ed. Vincent l. Wimbush, 15–25. minneapolis: fortress Press, 1990. “The Sinful Woman: a Memra by Jacob of serugh.” Tr. scott f. Johnson. Sobornost/Eastern Churches Review 24 (2002): 56–88. Jerome. Sancti Eusebii Hieronymi Epistulae. ed. isidorus hilberg. 3 vols. Csel 54–56. Vienna: f. Tempsky, 1910–18. repr., Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen akademie der Wissenschaften, 1996. John of antioch. Iohannis Antiocheni fragmenta ex Historia Chronica. ed. roberto Umberto. Texte und Untersuchungen zur geschichte der altchristlichen literatur 154. Berlin and new York: de gruyter, 2005. Iohannis Antiocheni fragmenta quae supersunt omnia. ed. sergei mariev. Corpus fontium historiae Byzantinae, series Berolinensis 47. Berlin and new York: de gruyter, 2008. John malalas. The Chronicle of Malalas: A Translation. Tr. elizabeth Jeffreys, michael Jeffreys, and roger scott. Byzantina australiensia 4. melbourne: australian association for Byzantine studies, 1986.

Bibliography

277

Chronographia. ed. hans Thurn. historiae Byzantinae 35. Berlin and new York: de gruyter, 2000. John rufus, The Lives of Peter the Iberian, Theodosius of Jerusalem, and the Monk Romanus. ed. and tr. Cornelia B. horn and robert r. Phenix Jr. Writings from the greco-roman World 24. atlanta: society of Biblical literature, 2008. . Plérophories, témoignages et révélations contre le Concile de Chalcédoine. ed. and tr. françois nau. Po 8.1:1–208. Paris: firmin-Didot, 1912. Julian the apostate. The Emperor Julian: Panegyric and Polemic. Tr. samuel n. C. lieu. Translated Texts for historians 2. liverpool: liverpool University Press, 1989. The Julian Romance. ed. and tr. michael sokoloff. Texts from Christian late antiquity 49. Piscataway, nJ: gorgias Press, 2017. Iulianos der Abtrünnige, Syrische Erzählungen. ed. Johann georg ernst hoffmann. leiden: Brill, 1880. lactantius. De mortibus persecutorum—Die Todesarten der Verfolger. ed. alfons städel. fontes Christiani 43. Brepols: Turnhout, 2003. Leges Visigothorum. ed. Karl Zeumer. in monumenta germaniae historica leg. nat. germ. 1. hannover: hahn, 1902. mark the Deacon. Vita Sancti Porphyrii. ed. and tr. adelheid hübner. fontes Christiani 53. freiburg: herder, 2013. michael the syrian. Chronique de Michel le Syrien, patriarche jacobite d’Antioche 1166–1199. ed. and tr. Jean-Baptiste Chabot. 4 vols. Paris: e. leroux, 1899–1910. repr., Piscataway, nJ: gorgias Press, 2008. The Syriac Chronicle of Michael Rabo (the Great): A Universal History from the Creation. Tr. matti moosa. Teaneck, nJ: Beth antioch Press, 2014. Partial translation: andrew Palmer et al. The Seventh Century in the West-Syrian Chronicles. Translated Texts for historians 15. liverpool: liverpool University Press, 1993. Midrash Rabba Genesis. Bereshit Rabba, mit kritischem Apparat und Kommentar, i–iii. ed. Yehuda Theodor and Chanoch albeck. Berlin: de gruyter, 1912–36. 2nd ed. Jerusalem: Wahrmann, 1965; repr., 1996. Tr. harry freedman. london: soncino, 1951. nestorius. The Bazaar of Heracleides. Tr. godfrey r. Driver and leonard hodgson. oxford: Clarendon Press, 1925. Le livre d’Heraclide de Damas. ed. Paul Bedjan. Paris and leipzig: otto harrassowitz, 1910. “on hermits and Desert Dwellers.” Tr. Joseph P. amar. in Ascetic Behavior in Greco-Roman Antiquity: A Sourcebook, ed. Vincent l. Wimbush, 66–80. studies in antiquity and Christianity. minneapolis: fortress Press, 1990. Peutinger Map. seamless Whole in Colour with overlaid layers. 2010. http://peutinger. atlantides.org/map-a/. Philo of alexandria. On Abraham; On Joseph; On Moses. ed. and tr. francis h. Colson and george h. Whitaker. loeb Classical library 275 and 289. london and Cambridge, ma: heinemann/harvard University Press, 1959/62.

278

Bibliography

rabbula of edessa. The Rabbula Corpus, Comprising the Life of Rabbula, His Correspondence, a Homily Delivered in Constantinople, Canons, and Hyms, with Texts in Syriac and Latin, English Translations, Notes and Introduction. ed. and tr. robert r. Phenix Jr. and Cornelia B. horn. Writings from the greco-roman World 17. atlanta: society of Biblical literature, 2017. Stewards of the Poor: The Man of God, Rabbula, and Hiba in Fifth-Century Edessa. Tr. robert Doran. Cistercian studies 208. Kalamazoo, mi: Cistercian Publications, 2006. romanos melodos. Die Hymnen. Tr. Johannes Koder. 2 vols. Bibliothek der griechischen literatur 62 and 64. stuttgart: anton hiersemann, 2005–6. Three Byzantine Saints: Contemporary Biographies of St. Daniel the Stylite, St. Theodore of Sykeon, and St. John the Almsgiver. Tr. elizabeth Dawes and norman h. Baynes. oxford: Blackwell, 1948. repr., Crestwood, nY: st Vladimir’s seminary Press, 1977. severus ibn al-muqaffa. L’histoire des conciles de Sévère ibn al-Moqaffaˁ évêque d’Aschmounaïn. ed. and tr. louis leroy. Po 6.4:465–600. Paris: firmin-Didot, 1911. Les saints Stylites. ed. hippolyte Delehaye. subsidia hagiographica 14. Brussels: société des Bollandistes, 1923. simeon stylites. Das Leben des heiligen Symeon Stylites. ed. hans lietzmann and heinrich hilgenfeld. Texte und Untersuchungen zur geschichte der altchristlichen literatur, 3. reihe, Bd. 2,4. leipzig: hinrichs, 1908. The Lives of Simeon Stylites. Tr. robert Doran. Cistercian studies 112. Kalamazoo, mi: Cistercian Publications, 1992. simeon the Younger. La vie ancienne de S. Syméon Stylite le Jeune (521–592). ed. and tr. Paul van den Ven. 2 vols. subsidia hagiographica 32. Brussels: société des Bollandistes, 1962–70. socrates scholasticus. Kirchengeschichte. ed. günther Christian hansen and manja Širinjan. Die griechischen christlichen schriftsteller, n.s., 1. Berlin: akademie Verlag, 1995. Le synaxaire arabe jacobite. ed and tr. rené Basset. Po t. 1, fasc. 3; t. 3, fasc. 3; t. 11, fasc. 5; t. 16, fasc. 3; t. 17, fasc. 3; t. 20, fasc. 5. Paris: firmin-Didot, 1907–29. The Teaching of Addai. ed. and tr. george howard. Text and Translations 16. Chico, Ca: society of Biblical literature, 1981. Theodore anagnostes. Kirchengeschichte. ed. günther Christian hansen. Die griechischen christlichen schriftsteller. Berlin: akademie Verlag, 1971. Theodoret of Cyrrhus. Correspondance I–II. ed. and tr. Yvan azéma. sources chrétiennes 40 and 98. Paris: Cerf, 1955–64. Histoire des moines de Syrie; Histoire Philothée XIV–XXX; Traité sur la charité (XXXI). ed. and tr. Pierre Canivet and alice leroy-molinghen. sources chrétiennes 257. Paris: Cerf, 1979. A History of the Monks of Syria. ed. and tr. richard m. Price. Cistercian studies 88. Kalamazoo, mi: Cistercian Publications, 1985. Theophanes, Chronographia. ed. Carl de Boor. 2 vols. leipzig: B.g. Teubner, 1883. The Chronicle of Theophanes Confessor: Byzantine and Near Eastern History, AD 284-813. Tr. Cyril mango and roger scott. oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997.

Bibliography

279

Theopistus. “l’histoire de Dioscore.” ed. and tr. françois nau. Journal Asiatique 10 (1903): 241–310. Ward, Benedicta. Harlots of the Desert: A Study of Repentance in Early Monastic Sources. Cistercian studies 106. Kalamazoo, mi: Cistercian Publications, 1987. Wright, William, ed. Catalogue of Syriac Manuscripts in the British Museum Acquired since the Year 1838. london: Trustees of the British museum and longmans, 1870–72. Ps.-Zacharias rhetor. The Chronicle of Pseudo-Zachariah Rhetor: Church and War in Late Antiquity. ed. geoffrey greatrex, tr. robert r. Phenix Jr. and Cornelia B. horn. Translated Texts for historians 55. liverpool: liverpool University Press, 2011. Historia Ecclesiastica Zacharaei rhetorii vulgo adscripta. ed. ernest W. Brooks. Vol. 2. CsCo 84, scriptores syri 89. louvain: Durbecq, 1953. se C o n Da rY l i T e r aT U r e

abel, felix-marie. Histoire de la Palestine depuis la conquête d’Alexandrie jusqu’à l’invasion arabe II: De la guerre juive à l’invasion arabe. Paris: gabalda, 1952. acerbi, silvia. Conflitti politico-ecclesiastici in oriente nella tarda antichità: II concilio di Efeso [449]. ‘ilu. revista de Ciencias de las religiones, anejo V. madrid: Universidad Complutense de madrid, 2001. . “il potere dei monaci nei concili orientali del v secolo: il costantinopolitano eutiche e il siro Bar sauma.” Studia Historica/Historia Antigua (salamanca) 24 (2006): 291–313. . “Terror y violencia antijudía en oriente durante el siglo V: la biografía del archimandrita sirio Bar sauma.” in Formas y usos de la violencia en el mundo romano, ed. gonzalo Bravo Castañeda and raúl gonzález salinero, 277–90. madrid: signifer, 2007. adshead, Katherine. “Procopius and the samaritans.” in The Sixth Century: End or Beginning, ed. Pauline allen and elizabeth Jeffreys, 35–41. Byzantina australiensia 10. Brisbane: australian association for Byzantine studies, 1996. allen, Pauline. Sophronius of Jerusalem and Seventh-Century Heresy: The “Synodical Letter” and Other Documents. oxford: oxford University Press, 2009. assemanus, Josephus s. Bibliotheca Orientalis Clementino-Vaticana. Vol. 2. rome: Typis sacrae Congregationis de Propaganda fide, 1721. repr., hildesheim: olms, 1975. avi-Yonah, michael. “art. Palästina.” RE suppl. 13 (1973): 321–454. , ed. Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land. Vols. i–iV. oxford: oxford University Press, 1975/78. . The Jews under Roman and Byzantine Rule: A Political History from the Bar Kokhba War to the Arab Conquest. Jerusalem: magnes Press, 1984. Bacht, heinrich. “Die rolle des orientalischen mönchtums in den kirchenpolitischen auseinandersetzungen um Chalkedon.” in Das Konzil von Chalkedon: Geschichte und Gegenwart, ed. alois grillmaier and heinrich Bacht, 193–314. Würzburg: echter, 1953. Badwi, abdo, and fady Baroudi. “le couvent de mar Barsauma: redécouverte du site.” Parole de l’Orient 31 (2006): 243–56. Bagatti, Bellarmino. Ancient Christian Villages of Samaria. Jerusalem: franciscan Printing Press, 2002. Bagnall, roger s., et al. Consuls of the Later Roman Empire. atlanta: scholars Press, 1987.

280

Bibliography

Bagnall, roger s., and K. a. Worp. Chronological Systems of Byzantine Egypt. 2nd ed. leiden and Boston: Brill, 2004. Baguenard, Jean-marie. Les moines acémètes: Vies des saints Alexandre, Marcel et Jean Calybite. spirtualité orientale 47. Bégroles-en-mauges: abbaye de Bellefontaine, 1988. Bar, Doron. “The Christianisation of rural Palestine during late antiquity.” Journal of Ecclesiastical History 54 (2003): 401–21. Barnes, Timothy D. The New Empire of Diocletian and Constantine. Cambridge, ma, and london: harvard University Press, 1982. . Early Christian Hagiography and Roman History. Tria Corda 5. Tübingen: mohr siebeck. 2010. Barsoum, ignatius a. i. The Scattered Pearls: A History of Syriac Literature and Sciences. Piscataway, nJ: gorgias Press, 2003. Belayche, nicole. Iudaea—Palaestina: The Pagan Cults in Roman Palestine (Second to Fourth Century). religion der römischen Provinzen 1. Tübingen: mohr siebeck, 2001. Bevan, george a. “The last Days of nestorius in the syriac sources.” Journal of the Canadian Society for Syriac Studies 7 (2007): 39–54. . The New Judas: The Case of Nestorius in Ecclesiastical Politics, 428–451 CE. late antique history and religion 13. Turnhout: Peeters, 2016. Bevan, george a., and Patrick T. r. gray. “The Trial of eutyches: a new interpretation.” Byzantinische Zeitschrift 101 (2008): 617–57. Beyeler, markus. Geschenke des Kaisers: Studien zur Chronologie, zu den Empfängern und zu den Gegenständen der kaiserlichen Vergabungen im 4. Jahrhundert n. Chr. Klio-Beiheft nf 18. Berlin: akademie, 2011. Binns, John. Ascetics and Ambassadors of Christ: The Monasteries of Palestine, 314–631. oxford: oxford University Press, 1994. Bitton-ashkelony, Brouria. Encountering the Sacred: The Debate on Christian Pilgrimage in Late Antiquity. Transformation of the Classical heritage 38. Berkeley, los angeles, and london: University of California Press, 2005. . “from sacred Travel to monastic Career: The evidence of late antique syriac hagiography.” Adamantius 16 (2010): 353–70. Bitton-ashkelony, Brouria, and aryeh Kofsky. The Monastic School of Gaza. supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 78. leiden: Brill, 2006. Blum, georg g. Rabbula von Edessa: Der Christ, der Bischof, der Theologe. CsCo 300, subsidia 34. louvain: secrétariat du CorpussCo, 1969. Boero, Dina. “The Context of Production of the Vatican manuscript of the Syriac Life of Symeon the Stylite.” Hugoye 18.2 (2015): 319–59. Böhm, martina. Samarien und die Samaritai bei Lukas: Eine Studie zum religionshistorischen und traditionsgeschichtlichen Hintergrund der lukanischen Samarientexte und zu deren topographischer Verhaftung. WUnT 2/111. Tübingen: mohr siebeck, 1999. Bou-mansour, Tanios. “les écrits ascétiques ou ‘monastiques’ d’isaac dit d’antioche.” in Christianisme oriental: Kerygme et histoire; Mélanges offerts au père Michel Hayek, ed. Charles Chartouni, 47–80. Paris: geuthner, 2007. Bowersock, glen W. “The syriac life of rabbula and syrian hellenism.” in Greek Biography and Panegyrics in Late Antiquity, ed. Tomas hägg and Philip rousseau, 255–71. Transfor-

Bibliography

281

mation of the Classical heritage 31. Berkeley and los angeles: University of California Press, 2000. Bowman, John. Samaritan Documents Relating to Their History, Religion, and Life. Pittsburgh: Pickwick, 1977. Brenk, Beat. “Die Umwandlung der synagoge von apamea in eine Kirche: eine mentalitätsgeschichtliche studie.” in Tesserae: Festschrift für Josef Engemann, ed. ernst Dassmann and Klaus Thraede, 1–25. Jahrbuch für antike und Christentum: ergänzungsband 18. münster: aschendorff, 1991. Brière, maurice. “l’abbé françois nau.” Journal Asiatique 223 (1933): 149–80. Brock, sebastian P. “The Baptist’s Diet in syriac sources.” Oriens Christianus 54 (1970): 113–24. . “a letter attributed to Cyril of Jerusalem of the rebuilding of the Temple.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 40 (1977): 267–86. reprinted in Brock, Syriac Perspectives on Late Antiquity, Variorum Collected studies series 199 (london: ashgate, 1984). . “The rebuilding of the Temple under Julian: a new source.” Palestinian Exploration Quarterly 118 (1978): 103–7. reprinted in Brock, Syriac Perspectives on Late Antiquity, Variorum Collected studies series 199 (london: ashgate, 1984). . “syriac hagiography.” in The Ashgate Research Companion to Byzantine Hagiography, vol. 1, Periods and Places, ed. stephanos efthymiadis, 259–84. london: ashgate, 2011. Brown, Peter. “The rise and function of the holy man in late antiquity.” Journal of Roman Studies 61 (1971): 80–101. reprinted in Brown, Society and the Holy in Late Antiquity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982), 103–52. . “The saint as exemplar.” Representations 2 (1983): 1–25. . The Body and Society: Men, Women, and Sexual Renunciation in Early Christianity. lectures on the history of religions 13. new York: Columbia University Press, 1988. . “Christianization and religious Conflict.” in The Late Empire, A.D. 337–425, ed. averil Cameron and Peter garnsey, 632–64. Cambridge ancient history Xiii. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Burgess, richard W. “The accession of marcian in the light of Chalcedonian apologetic and monophysite Polemic.” Byzantinische Zeitschrift 86/87 (1993/94): 47–68. reprinted in Burgess, Chronicles, Consuls, and Coins: Historiography and History in the Later Roman Empire (farnham: ashgate, 2011), ch. 12. Burman, J. “The athenian empress eudocia.” in Post-Herulian Athens: Aspects of Life and Culture in Athens, A.D. 267–529, ed. Paavo Castrén, 63–87. helsinki: suomen ateenaninstituutin säätiö, 1994. Busch, anja. Die Frauen der theodosianischen Dynastie: Macht und Repräsentation kaiserlicher Frauen im 5. Jahrhundert. stuttgart: steiner, 2015. Busse, heribert, and georg Kretschmar. Jerusalemer Heiligtumstraditionen in altkirchlicher und frühislamischer Zeit. Wiesbaden: harrassowitz, 1987. Cain, andrew. The Greek “Historia Monachorum in Aegypto”: Monastic Hagiography in the Late Fourth Century. oxford: oxford University Press, 2016.

282

Bibliography

Caner, Daniel. “notions of ‘strict Discipline’ and apostolic Practice in early Definitions of orthodox monasticism.” in Orthodoxie, Christianisme, Histoire, ed. susanna elm, Éric rebillard, and antonella romano, 23–34. rome: École de française de rome, 2000. . Wandering, Begging Monks: Spiritual Authority and the Promotion of Monasticism in Late Antiquity. Transformation of the Classical heritage 33. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002. . “Towards a miraculous economy: Christian gifts and material ‘Blessings’ in late antiquity.” Journal of Early Christian Studies 14 (2006): 329–77. . “Wealth, stewardship, and Charitable ‘Blessings’ in early Byzantine monasticism.” in Wealth and Poverty in Early Church and Society, ed. susan r. holman, 221–42. grand rapids, mi: Baker academic, 2008. . “from the Pillar to the Prison: Penitential spectacles in early Byzantine monasticism.” in Ascetic Culture: Essays in Honor of Philip Rousseau, ed. Blake leyerle and robin Darling Young, 127–46. notre Dame, in: notre Dame University Press, 2013. Canivet, Pierre. “Théodoret et le monachisme syrien avant le concile de Chalcédoine.” in Théologie de la vie monastique, ed. georgius marié and rogerius gazeau, 241–82. Paris: aubier, 1961. . Le monachisme syrien selon Théodoret de Cyr. Théologie historique 42. Paris: Beauchesne, 1977. Caseau, Beatrice. “sacred landscapes.” in Late Antiquity: A Guide to the Postclassical World, ed. glen W. Bowersock, Peter Brown, and oleg grabar, 21–59. Cambridge, ma, and london: harvard University Press, 1999. Chadwick, henry. “The exile and Death of flavian of Constantinople: a Prologue to the Council of Chalcedon.” Journal of Theological Studies, n.s., 6 (1955): 17–34. Chastagnol, andré. “les inscriptions des monuments inaugurés lors des fêtes impériales.” Mélanges de l’École Française de Rome 100 (1988): 13–26. reprinted in Chastagnol, Le pouvoir impérial à Rome: Figures et commémorations, hautes études du monde grécoromain 41 (geneva: Droz, 2008), 303–16. Clark, elizabeth a. “Claims on the Bones of saint stephen: The Partisans of melania and eudocia.” Church History 51 (1982): 141–56. Clauss, manfred. Der Magister Officiorum in der Spätantike (4.-6. Jahrhundert): Das Amt und sein Einfluß auf die kaiserliche Politik. Vestigia 32. munich: C.h. Beck, 1981. Cohen, Jeremy m., ed. A Samaritan Chronicle: A Source-Critical Analysis of the Life and Times of the Great Samaritan Reformer, Baba Rabbah. studia Post-Biblica 30. leiden: Brill, 1981. Corcoran, simon. The Empire of the Tetrarchs: Imperial Pronouncements and Government, AD 284–324. rev. ed. oxford: Clarendon Press, 2000. . “state Correspondence in the roman empire: imperial Communication from augustus to Justinian.” in State Correspondence in the Ancient World: From New Kingdom to the Roman Empire, 172–209. oxford: oxford University Press, 2014. Croke, Brian. “The Date and Circumstances of marcian’s Decease, a.D. 457.” Byzantion 48 (1978): 5–9. Crowfoot, John Winter, et al. The Buildings at Samaria. Vol. 2 of Samaria-Sebaste: Reports of the Work of the Joint Expedition in 1931–33 and of the British Expedition in 1935. london: Palestine exploration fund, 1942.

Bibliography

283

Crown, alan D. “The Byzantine and moslem Period.” in The Samaritans, ed. alan D. Crown, 54–81. Tübingen: J.C.B. mohr (Paul siebeck), 1989. , ed. The Samaritans. Tübingen: J.C.B. mohr (Paul siebeck), 1989. Crown, alan D., reinhard Pummer, and abraham Tal, eds. A Companion to Samaritan Studies. Tübingen: mohr siebeck, 1993. Cuntz, otto. Itineraria Romana. Vol. 1. stuttgart: Teubner, 1929. Dagron, gilbert. “les moines et la ville: le monachisme à Constantinople.” Travaux et Mémoires 4 (1970): 229–76. Dauphin, Claude. “Dora-Dor: a station for Pilgrims in the Byzantine Period on Their Way to Jerusalem.” in Ancient Churches Revealed, ed. Yoram Tsafrir, 90–97. Jerusalem: Biblical archaeology society, 1993. . La Palestine byzantine: Peuplement et populations. Bar international series 726. oxford: archaeopress, 1998. Dauphin, Claude, and Caillan Davenport. “imperial ideology and Commemorative Culture in the eastern roman empire, 284–450 Ce.” in Byzantium, Its Neighbours, and Its Cultures, ed. Danijel Dzino and Ken Parry, 45–70. Byzantina australiensia 20. Brisbane: australian association for Byzantine studies, 2014. Débie, muriel. L’écriture de l’histoire en syriaque. leuven: Peeters, 2015. Delehaye, hippolyte, ed. L’ancienne hagiographie byzantine: Les sources, les premiers modèles, la formation des genres. studia hagiographica 73. Brussels: société des Bollandistes, 1991. Delmaire, roland. “les dignitaires laics au Concile de Chalcédoine: notes sur la hiérarchie et les préséances au milieu du Ve siècle.” Byzantion 54 (1984): 141–75. Déroche, Vincent. Études sur Léontios de Néapolis. acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, studia Byzantina Upsalensia 3. Uppsala: Uppsala Universitet, 1995. . “la forme de l’informe: la Vie de Théodore de sykéôn et la Vie de syméon stylite le jeune.” in Les Vies des saints à Byzance: Genre littéraire ou biographie historique? ed. Paolo odorico and Panagiotis a. agapitos, 367–85. Dossiers byzantins 4. Paris: Centre d’études byzantines, néo-helléniques et sud-est européennes, 2004. Detoraki, marina. “greek Passions of the martyrs in Byzantium.” in The Ashgate Research Companion to Byzantine Hagiography, vol. 2, ed. stephanos efthymiadis, 61–101. farnham and surrey: ashgate, 2014. Dilley, Paul C. “The invention of Christian Tradition—‘apocrypha’, imperial Policy, and anti-Jewish Propaganda.” Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 50 (2010): 586–615. Di segni, leah. “The samaritans in roman-Byzantine Palestine.” in Religious and Ethnic Communities in Later Roman Palestine, ed. hayim lapin, 51–66. Bethesda: University Press of maryland, 1998. Downey, glanville. A History of Antioch in Syria from Seleucus to the Arab Conquest. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1961. Drake, harold a., ed. Violence in Late Antiquity: Perceptions and Practices. aldershot and Burlington: ashgate, 2006. Drijvers, han J. W., and Jan Willem Drijvers. The Finding of the True Cross: The Judas Kyriakos Legend in Syriac; Introduction, Text, and Translation. CsCo 565, subsidia 93. louvain: Peeters, 1997.

284

Bibliography

Drijvers, Jan Willem. Helena Augusta: The Mother of Constantine the Great and the Legend of Her Finding of the True Cross. Brill’s studies in intellectual history 27. leiden: Brill, 1992. . “The Protonike legend, the Doctrina Addai, and Bishop rabbula of edessa.” Vigiliae Christianae 51 (1997): 298–315. . “The syriac Julian romance: aspects of the Jewish-Christian Controversy in late antiquity.” in All Those Nations: Cultural Encounters within and with the Near East; Studies Presented to Han Drijvers at the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday, ed. herman l. J. Vanstiphout, 31–42. groningen: sTYX Publications, 1999. . Cyril of Jerusalem: Bishop and City. supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 72. leiden: Brill, 2004. . “religious Conflict in the syriac Julian romance.” in Pagans and Christians in the Roman Empire (IVth–VIth Century A.D.): The Breaking of a Dialogue; Proceedings of the International Conference at the Monastery of Bose (October 2008), ed. Peter Brown and rita lizzi Testa, 131–62. Vienna and Berlin: lit, 2011. . “Transformation of a City: The Christianization of Jerusalem in the fourth Century.” in Cults, Creeds, and Identities in the Greek City after the Classical Age, ed. richard alston et al., 309–29. louvain: Peeters, 2013. Duchesne, louis. Histoire ancienne de l’Église. Vol. 3. Paris: fontemoing and Cie, 1911. Duling, Dennis C. “Testament of solomon.” in The Old Testament Pseudepigraphica, vol. 1, ed. James h. Charlesworth, 935–87. Peabody, ma: hendrickson Publishers, 1983. Dvorjetski, estée. “The synagogue-Church at gerasa in Jordan: a Contribution to the study of ancient synagogues.” Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 121 (2005): 140–67. efthymiadis, stephanos. “greek hagiography in late antiquity (fourth-seventh Centuries).” in The Ashgate Research Companion to Byzantine Hagiography, vol. 1, Periods and Places, ed. stephanos efthymiadis, 35–94. farnham: ashgate, 2011. eliav, Yaron Z. God’s Mountain: The Temple Mount in Time, Place, and Memory. Baltimore: Johns hopkins University Press, 2005. elm, susanna. Sons of Hellenism, Fathers of the Church: Emperor Julian, Gregory of Nazianzus, and the Vision of Rome. Transformation of the Classical heritage 49. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2012. elton, hugh. “The nature of the sixth-Century isaurians.” in Ethnicity and Culture in Late Antiquity, ed. stephen mitchell and george greatrex, 293–308. london: Duckworth and The Classical Press of Wales, 2000. . “imperial Politics at the Court of Theodosius ii.” in The Power of Religion in Late Antiquity, ed. andrew Cain and noel lenski, 133–42. farnham: ashgate Press, 2009. escolan, Philippe. Monachisme et église: Le monachisme syrien du IVe au VIIe siècle: Un ministère charismatique. Théologie historique 109. Paris: Beauchesne, 1999. fine, steven, ed. Jews, Christians, and Polytheists in the Ancient Synagogue: Cultural Interaction during the Graeco-Roman Period. london and new York: routledge, 1999. fitschen, Klaus. Messalianismus und Antimessalianismus: Ein Beispiel ostkirchlicher Ketzergeschichte. forschungen zur Kirchen- und Dogmengeschichte 71. göttingen: Vandenhoeck and ruprecht, 1998.

Bibliography

285

flusin, Bernard. “Palestinian hagiography (fourth–eighth Centuries).” in The Ashgate Research Companion to Byzantine Hagiography, vol. 1, Periods and Places, ed. stephanos efthymiadis, 199–226. farnham: ashgate, 2011. förster, hans. “Die Begegnung am Brunnen (Joh 4.4–42) im licht der ‘schrift’: Überlegungen zu den samaritanern im Johannesevangelium.” New Testament Studies 61 (2015): 201–18. frakes, robert m., and elizabeth DePalmer Digeser, eds. Religious Identity in Late Antiquity. Toronto: edgar Kent, 2006. frank, Karl s. ΑΓΓΕΛΙΚΟΣ ΒΙΟΣ: Begriffsanalytische und begriffsgeschichtliche Untersuchung zum “engelgleichen Leben” im frühen Mönchtum. Beiträge zur geschichte des alten mönchtums und des Benediktinertums 26. münster: aschendorff, 1964. fraser, michael a. “The feast of the encaenia in the fourth Century and in the ancient liturgical sources of Jerusalem.” PhD diss., Durham University, 1995. frederiksen, Paula, and oded irshai. “Christian anti-Judaism.” in The Late RomanRabbinic Period, ed. steven T. Katz, 977–1034. The Cambridge history of Judaism iV. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. freimark, Peter, and Wolfgang-friedrich Krämer. Die Tosefta: Seder I: Zeraim; 2: DemaiSchebiit. stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1971. friedheim, emmanuel. Rabbinisme et paganisme en Palestine romaine: Étude historique des “Realia” talmudiques (Ier–IVème siècles). religions in the graeco-roman World 157. leiden: Brill, 2006. frumkin, amos. “The Water-supply network of samaria-sebaste.” in The Aqueducts of Israel, ed. David amit, Joseph Patrich, and Yizhar hirschfeld, 267–77. Journal of roman archaeology, supplementary series 46. Portsmouth, ri: Journal of roman archaeology, 2002. gaddis, michael. There Is No Crime for Those Who Have Christ: Religious Violence in the Roman Empire. Transformation of the Classical heritage 39. Berkeley, los angeles, and london: University of California Press, 2006. gaşpar, Cristian-nicolae. “an oriental in greek Dress: The making of a Perfect Christian Philosopher in the Philotheos Historia of Theodoret of Cyrrhus.” Annual of Medieval Studies at CEU 14 (2008): 193–229. gatier, Pierre-louis. “Un moine sur la frontière: alexandre le acémète en syrie.” in Frontières terrestres, frontières célestes dans l’antiquité, ed. aline rousselle, 435–57. Paris: Presses Universitaires de Perpignan, 1995. gentz, günter, and friedhelm Winkelmann. Die Kirchengeschichte des Nicephorus Callistus Xanthopulus und ihre Quellen. Berlin: akademie, 1966. gero, stephen. Barsauma of Nisibis and Persian Christianity in the Fifth Century. CsCo 426, subsidia 63. louvain: secrétariat du CorpussCo, 1981. goodblatt, David. “The Political and social history of the Jewish Community in the land of israel, c. 235–638.” in The Late Roman-Rabbinic Period, ed. steven T. Katz, 404–30. The Cambridge history of Judaism iV. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. goodman, martin, and Philip alexander, eds. Rabbinic Texts and the History of Late Roman Palestine. Proceedings of the British academy 165. london and oxford: British academy and oxford University Press, 2011.

286

Bibliography

graumann, Thomas. “Theodosius ii and the Politics of the first Council of ephesus.” in Theodosius II: Rethinking the Roman Empire in Late Antiquity, ed. Christopher Kelly, 109–29. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013. greatrex, george, hugh elton, and richard W. Burgess. “Urbicius’ Epitedeuma.” Byzantinische Zeitschrift 98 (2005): 35–74. gregory, Timothy e. Vox Populi: Violence and Popular Involvement in the Religious Controversies of the Fifth Century A.D. Columbus: ohio state University Press, 1979. griffith, sidney h. “asceticism in the Church of syria: The hermeneutics of early syrian monasticism.” in Asceticism, ed. Vincent l. Wimbush and richard Valantasis, 220–45. new York: oxford University Press, 1995. . “The Doctrina Addai as a Paradigm of Christian Thought in edessa in the fifth Century.” Hugoye 6.2 (2003): 269–92. grillmeier, alois. Jesus der Christus im Glauben der Kirche. Vols. 1 and 2.1. freiburg: herder, 1979–2004. . “la ‘Peste d’origène’: soucis du patriarche d’alexandrie dus à l’apparition d’origénistes en haute Égypte (444–451).” in Alexandrina: Hellénisme, judaïsme et christianisme à Alexandrie; Mélanges offerts au P. Claude Mondésert, 221–37. Patrimoines 1. Paris: Cerf, 1987. guillaumont, antoine. “le dépaysement comme forme d’ascèse dans l monachisme ancien.” Annuaire—École Pratique des Hautes Études: Section des Sciences Religieuses 76 (1968–69): 31–58. gysens, Jacqueline C. “Change and Continuity in Urban settlement Patterns in Palaestina Tertia: The Case of Christian areopolis (rabba, Jordan).” Aram 15 (2003): 1–10. haarer, fiona. Anastasius I: Politics and Empire in the Late Roman World. arCa: Classical and medieval Texts, Papers and monographs 46. Cambridge: francis Cairns, 2006. hachlili, rachel, ed. Ancient Synagogues in Israel, Third-Seventh Century C.E. Bar international series 499. oxford: archaeopress, 1989. . Ancient Jewish Art and Archaeology in the Diaspora. handbuch der orientalistik, erste abteilung, Der nahe und mittlere osten 35. leiden: Brill, 1998. haehling, raban von. “Damascius und die heidnische opposition im 5. Jahrhundert nach Christus.” Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum 23 (1980): 82–95. haensch, rudolf. “Die Verwendung von siegeln bei Dokumenten der kaiserzeitlichen reichsadministration.” in Archives et sceaux du monde hellénistique, ed. marie-françoise Boussac and antonio invernizzi, 449–96. BCh supplement 29. athens: École française d’athènes, athènes, 1996 [1997]. . “Das öffentliche siegel der griechischen staaten—zwischen Kontrollmittel und staatssymbol.” in Symposium 2003: Vorträge zur griechischen und hellenistischen Rechtsgeschichte, ed. hans-albert rupprecht, 255–79. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen akademie der Wissenschaften, 2006. hahn, Johannes. “Kaiser Julian und ein dritter Tempel? idee, Wirklichkeit und Wirkung eines gescheiterten Projektes.” in Zerstörungen des Jerusalemer Tempels: Geschehen— Wahrnehmung—Bewältigung, ed. Johannes hahn, 237–62. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum neuen Testament 147. Tübingen: mohr siebeck, 2002.

Bibliography

287

. Gewalt und religiöser Konflikt: Studien zu den Auseinandersetzungen zwischen Christen, Heiden und Juden im Osten des Römischen Reiches (von Konstantin bis Theodosius II.). Klio-Beiheft 8. Berlin: akademie Verlag, 2004. . “ ‘Tausend schrecken der gesetze’ (nov. Theod 3)? Kaiserliche religionspolitik, der Kampf gegen das heidentum und das Wirken schenutes in oberägypten.” Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum 55 (2012) [2014]: 5–33. hahn, Johannes, stephen emmel, and Ulrich gotter, eds. From Temple to Church: Destruction and Renewal of Local Cultic Topography in Late Antiquity. religions of the graecoroman World 163. leiden: Brill, 2008. hansen, günther Christian. “ein kurzer Bericht über das Konzil von Chalkedon.” Fontes Minores 10 (1998): 101–39. harries, Jill. “men without Women: Theodosius’ Consistory and the Business of government.” in Theodosius II: Rethinking the Roman Empire in Late Antiquity, ed. Christopher Kelly, 67–89. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013. harvey, susan a. “The sense of a stylite: Perspectives on symeon the elder.” Vigiliae Christianae 42 (1988): 376–94. . “The holy and the Poor: models from early syriac Christianity.” in Through the Eye of a Needle: Judeo-Christian Roots of Social Welfare, ed. emily a. hanawalt, 43–66. Kirksville, mo: Thomas Jefferson University Press, 1994. hatlie, Peter. The Monks and Monasteries of Constantinople, ca. 350–850. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. hauken, Tor. Petition and Response: An Epigraphic Study of Petitions to Roman Emperors (181–249). monographs from the norwegian institute at athens 2. Bergen: norwegian institute at athens, 1998. hausherr, irénée. Penthos: La doctrine de la componction dans l’orient chrétien. orientalia Christiana analecta 132. rome: Pont. institutum studiorum orientalium 1944. Translated as Penthos: The Doctrine of Compunction in the Christian East, tr. anselm hufstader, Cistercian studies 5 (Kalamazoo, mi: Cistercian Publications, 1982). heal, Kristian s. “a note on Jacob of sarug’s memre on Joseph.” Hugoye 14 (2011): 215–23. heal, Kristian s., and robert a. Kitchen, eds. Breaking the Mind: New Studies in the Syriac Book of Steps. Washington, DC: Catholic University of america Press, 2013. henze, matthias. The Madness of King Nebuchadnezzar: The Ancient Near Eastern Origins and Early History of Interpretation of Daniel 4. supplement to the Journal for the study of Judaism 61. leiden, Boston, and Cologne: Brill, 1999. hevelone-harper, Jennifer l. Disciples of the Desert: Monks, Laity, and Spiritual Authority in Sixth-Century Gaza. Baltimore: Johns hopkins University Press, 2005. hirschfeld, Yizhar. “edible Wild Plants: The secret Diet of monks in the Judaean Desert.” Israel Land and Nature 16 (1990): 25–28. hjelm, ingrid. “mt. gerizim and samaritans in recent research.” in Samaritans: Past and Present; Current Studies, ed. menachem mor and friedrich V. reiterer, 25–41. studia Judaica 53 = studia samaritana 5. Berlin: de gruyter, 2010. holum, Kenneth g. “Caesarea and the samaritans.” in City, Town, and Countryside in the Early Byzantine Era, ed. robert l. hohlfelder, 65–73. new York: Columbia University Press, 1982.

288

Bibliography

. Theodosian Empresses: Women and Imperial Dominion in Late Antiquity. Transformation of the Classical heritage 3. Berkeley, los angeles, and london: University of California Press, 1982. honigmann, ernest. “Juvenal of Jerusalem.” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 5 (1950): 209–79. . Le couvent de Barsauma et le patriarcat jacobite d’Antioche et de Syrie. CsCo 146, subsidia 7. louvain: imprimerie orientaliste l. Durbecq, 1954. honoré, Tony. Law in the Crisis of Empire (379–455 AD): The Theodosian Dynasty and Its Quaestors. oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998. horbury, William. “Papus and lulianus in Jewish resistance to rome.” in Jewish Studies at the Turn of the 20th Century, ed. Judit Taragona Borras and angel saenz-Badillos, 1:28995. leiden: Brill, 1999. horn, Cornelia B. “empress eudocia and the monk Peter the iberian: Patronage, Pilgrimage, and the love of a foster-mother in fifth-Century Palestine.” Byzantinische Forschungen 28 (2004): 197–213. . Asceticism and Christological Controversy in Fifth-Century Palestine: The Career of Peter the Iberian. oxford: oxford University Press, 2006. . “anti-Jewish Polemic and Conversion of Jews to anti-Chalcedonian asceticism in the holy land: The Case of eugenia of Tyre.” Aram 18–19 (2006–7): 33–48. . “Children as Pilgrims and the Cult of holy Children in the early syriac Tradition.” Aram 18–19 (2006–7): 439–62. horn, Cornelia B., and John W. martens. “Let the Little Children Come to Me”: Childhood and Children in Early Christianity. Washington, DC: Catholic University of america Press, 2009. humphries, mark. “Valentinian iii. and the City of rome (425–455).” in Two Romes: Rome and Constantinople in Late Antiquity, ed. lucy grig and gavin Kelly, 161–82. oxford: oxford University Press, 2012. hunt, edward D. Holy Land Pilgrimage in the Later Roman Empire, AD 312–460. oxford: oxford University Press, 1982. ioan, ovidiu. “Controverses entre la hiérarchie ecclésiale et les moines dans le christianisme syriaque.” in Le monachisme syriaque, ed. florence Jullien, 89–106. Études syriaques 7. Paris: geuthner, 2010. irshai, oded. “Constantine and the Jews: The Prohibition against entering Jerusalem— history and hagiography.” Zion 60 (1995): 129–78 [hebrew, with english summary]. . “The role of the Priesthood in the Jewish Community in late antiquity: a Christian model?” in Jüdische Gemeinden und ihr christlicher Kontext: Konzeptionen und Aspekte, ed. Christoph Cluse, alfred haverkamp, and israel J. Yuval, 75–85. hannover: hahnsche Buchhandlung, 2003. isaac, Benjamin h. The Limits of Empire: The Roman Army in the East. 2nd ed. oxford: oxford University Press, 1992. . The Near East under Roman Rule. leiden: Brill, 1998. Jacobs, andrew s. The Remains of the Jews: The Holy Land and Christian Empire in Late Antiquity. stanford, Ca: stanford University Press, 2004. Jones, arnold h. m. The Later Roman Empire (284–602): A Social, Economic, and Administrative Survey. 2 vols. oxford: Blackwell, 1964.

Bibliography

289

Jullien, florence, ed. Le monachisme syriaque. Paris: geuthner, 2010. Kaldellis, anthony. “The hagiography of Doubt and scepticism.” in The Ashgate Research Companion to Byzantine Hagiography, vol. 2, ed. stephanos efthymiadis, 453–77. farnham and surrey: ashgate, 2014. Kaplan, michel. “les saints en pèlerinage à l’époque protobyzantine.” in Pèlerinages et lieux saints dans l’antiquité et le moyen âge: Melanges offerts à Pierre Maraval, ed. Beatrice Caseau, Jean-Claude Cheynet, and Vincent Déroche, 249–62. Paris: association des amis du Centre d’histoire et civil, 2006. Kartveit, magnar. “Josephus on the samaritans—his Tendenz and Purpose.” in Samaria, Samarians, Samaritans: Studies on Bible, History, and Linguistics, ed. József Zsengellér, 109–20. studia Judaica 66 = studia samaritana 6. Berlin: de gruyter, 2011. Katz, steven T., ed. The Late Roman-Rabbinic Period. The Cambridge history of Judaism iV. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Kaufhold, hubert. “notizen zur späten geschichte des Barsaumō-Klosters.” Hugoye 3.2 (2000): 223–46. Kelly, Christopher, ed. Theodosius II: Rethinking the Roman Empire in Late Antiquity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013. Keßler, manuela. “Die religionspolitik des Kaisers marcianus (450–457).” PhD diss., J.W. goethe Universität frankfurt, 2011. Kiperwasser, reuben, and serge ruzer. “The holy land and its inhabitants in the Pilgrimage narrative of the Persian monk Bar sauma.” Cathedra 148 (2013): 41–70 [in hebrew]. Kippenberg, hans g. Garizim and Synagoge: Traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zur samaritanischen Religion der aramäischen Periode. religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten 30. Berlin: de gruyter, 1971. Kirkpatrick, Jonathan. “how to Be a Bad samaritan: The local Cult of mt gerizim.” in The Variety of Local Religious Life in the Near East in the Hellenistic and Roman Periods, ed. Ted Kaizer, 155–78. religions of the graeco-roman World 164. leiden: Brill, 2008. Klein, Konstantin m. “ ‘Do Good in Thy Pleasure unto Zion’: The Patronage of aelia eudokia in Jerusalem.” in Female Founders in Byzantium and Beyond, ed. lioba Theis et al., 85–95. Wiener Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 60/61. Vienna: Böhlau, 2011/2012. . “The Politics of holy space: Jerusalem in the Theodosian era (379–457 Ce).” in Locating the Middle Ages: The Space and Places of Medieval Culture, ed. Julian Weiss and sarah salih, 95–107. Kings College london medieval studies 22. london: King’s College london, Centre for late antique & medieval studies, 2012. Kofsky, aryeh. “observations on Christian-Jewish Coexistence in late antique Palestine (5th to 7th Centuries).” Annali di Storia dell’Esegesi 23 (2006): 433–46. . “Julianism after Julian of halicarnassus.” in Between Personal and Institutional Religion: Aspects of Thought and Practice in Eastern Christianity (5th to 8th Century), ed. Brouria Bitton-ashkelony and lorenzo Perrone, 251–94. Turnhout: Brepols, 2013. Kofsky, aryeh, and amitai spitzer. “The invention of stephen’s Tomb.” in Ut videant et contingant: Essays on Pilgrimage and Sacred Space, ed. Yitzhak hen and iris shagrir, 29–48. raanana: The open University of israel, 2011 [in hebrew]. Kofsky, aryeh, and guy g. stroumsa, eds. Sharing the Sacred: Religious Contacts and Conflicts in the Holy Land. Jerusalem: Yad izhak Ben Zvi, 1998.

290

Bibliography

Kosiński, rafał. “The life of nestorius as seen in greek and oriental sources.” in Continuity and Change: Studies in Late Antique Historiography, ed. Dariusz Brodka and michal stachura, 155–70. electrum 13. Cracow: Jagiellonian University Press, 2007. . “The fate of nestorius after the Council of ephesus in 431.” Sakarya Üniversitesi Fen Edebiyat Dergisi 10 (2008): 33–48. Kraemer, ross shepard. When Aseneth Met Joseph: A Late Antique Tale of the Biblical Patriarch and His Egyptian Wife. new York: oxford University Press, 1998. Krueger, Derek. “Typological figuration in Theodoret of Cyrrhus’s religious history and the art of Postbiblical narrative.” Journal of Early Christian Studies 5 (1997): 393–419. . Writing and Holiness: The Practice of Authorship in the Early Christian East. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004. . “early Byzantine historiography and hagiography as Different modes of Christian Practice.” in Writing “True Stories”: Historians and Hagiographers in the Late Antique and Mediaeval Near East, ed. arietta Papaconstantinou, 13–20. Cultural encounters in late antiquity and the middle ages 9. Turnhout: Brepols, 2010. landelle, marc. “la titulature des magistri militum au iVe siècle après J.C.” Antiquité Tardive 22 (2014): 195–221. lander, shira l. “inventing synagogue Conversion: The Case of late roman north africa.” Journal of Ancient Judaism 4 (2013): 401–16. lane fox, robin. “The life of Daniel.” in Portraits: Biographical Representation in the Greek and Latin Literature of the Roman Empire, ed. mark J. edwards and simon swain, 175– 226. oxford: oxford University Press, 1997. laniado, avshalom. “abba ammonathas et son miracle: fiscalité, diplomatique et sainteté en Égypte byzantine.” in Mélanges Jean Gascou: Textes et études papyrologiques (P. Gascou), ed. Jean-luc fournet and arietta Papaconstantinou, 597–611. Travaux et mémoires 20.1. Paris: association des amis du Centre d’histoire et civilisation de Byzance, 2016. lee, allen D. “The eastern empire: Theodosius to anastasius.” in Late Antiquity: Empire and Successors, AD 425–600, ed. averil Cameron, Bryan Ward-Perkins, and michael Whitby, 33–62. The Cambridge ancient history 14. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. . “Theodosius and his generals.” in Theodosius II: Rethinking the Roman Empire in Late Antiquity, ed. Christopher Kelly, 90–108. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013. leemans, Johan, et al. Episcopal Elections in Late Antiquity. arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte 119. Berlin and Boston: de gruyter, 2011. lehmann, henning. Students of the Bible in 4th and 5th Century Syria: Seats of Learning, Sidelights, and Syriacisms. aarhus: aarhus University Press, 2008. lehnardt, andreas. “The samaritans (Kutim) in the Talmud Yerushalmi: Constructs of ‘rabbinic mind’ or reflections of social reality?” in The Talmud Yerushalmi and GraecoRoman Culture III, ed. Peter schäfer, 139–60. Texts and studies in ancient Judaism 93. Tübingen: mohr siebeck, 2002. lenski, noel. “assimilation and revolt in the Territory of isauria, from the 1st Century B.C. to the 6th Century a.D.” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 42 (1999): 413–65. . “empresses in the holy land: The Creation of a Christian Utopia in late antique Palestine.” in Travel, Communication, and Geography in Late Antiquity: Sacred and Profane, ed. linda ellis and frank l. Kidner, 113–24. aldershot: ashgate, 2004.

Bibliography

291

levenson, David B. “The ancient and medieval sources for the emperor Julian’s attempt to rebuild the Jerusalem Temple.” Journal for the Study of Judaism 35 (2004): 409–60. . “The Palestinian earthquake of may 363 in Philostorgius, the syriac Chronicon miscellaneum, and the letter attributed to Cyril on the rebuilding of the Jerusalem Temple.” Journal of Late Antiquity 6 (2013): 60–83. levine, lee i. Caesarea under Roman Rule. studies in Judaism in late antiquity 7. leiden: Brill, 1975. , ed. The Synagogue in Late Antiquity. Philadelphia: american schools of oriental research, 1987. . The Ancient Synagogue: The First Thousand Years. new haven and london: Yale University Press, 2001. , ed. Continuity and Renewal: Jews and Judaism in Byzantine-Christian Palestine. Jerusalem: Yad Ben-Zvi Press and The Jewish Theological seminary of america, 2004. liebs, Detlef. Hofjuristen der römischen Kaiser bis Justinian. munich: Verlag der Bayerischen akademie der Wissenschaften, 2010. limor, ora. Pilgrimage Travels to the Holy Land: Christian Pilgrims in Late Antiquity. Jerusalem: Yad izhak ben-Zvi, 1998 [in hebrew]. linder, amnon. The Jews in Roman Imperial Legislation. Detroit and Jerusalem: Wayne state University Press and The israel academy of sciences and humanities, 1987. lópez, ariel g. Shenoute of Atripe and the Uses of Poverty: Rural Patronage, Religious Conflict, and Monasticism in Late Antique Egypt. Transformation of the Classical heritage 50. Berkeley and los angeles: University of California Press, 2013. lubomierski, nina. “The Vita Sinuthii (The life of shenoute): Panegyric or Biography.” Studia Patristica 39 (2006): 417–21. macDonald, John. The Theology of the Samaritans. london: sCm Press, 1964. macmullen, ramsay. Christianizing the Roman Empire. new haven and london: Yale University Press, 1984. macrides, ruth, Joseph a. munitiz, and Dimiter angelov, eds. Pseudo-Kodinos and the Constantinopolitan Court: Offices and Ceremonies. Birmingham Byzantine and ottoman studies 13. farnham: ashgate, 2013. magen, Yitzhak. “The Church of mary Theotokos on mount gerizim.” in Christian Archaeology in the Holy Land: New Discoveries; Essays in Honor of Virgilio G. Corbo, ed. giovanni C. Borrini, leah Di segni, and eugenio alliata, 333–42. studium Biblicum franciscanum, Collectio maior 36. Jerusalem: franciscan Printing Press, 1990. . “mount gerizim and the samaritans.” in Early Christianity in Context: Monuments and Documents, ed. frédéric manns and eugenio alliata, 91–147. studium Biblicum franciscanum, Collectio maior 38. Jerusalem: Yad izhak Ben-Zvi, 1993. . “samaritan synagogues.” in Early Christianity in Context: Monuments and Documents, ed. frédéric manns and eugenio alliata, 193–230. studium Biblicum franciscanum, Collectio maior 38. Jerusalem: Yad izhak Ben-Zvi, 1993. . “mount gerizim during the roman and Byzantine Period.” Qadmoniot 33 (2000): 133–43. magen, Yitzhak, et al., eds. Mount Gerizim Excavations, I: The Aramaic, Hebrew, and Samaritan Inscriptions; II: A Temple City. Jerusalem: staff officer of archaeology, Civil administration of Judea and samaria, israel antiquities authority, 2004/8.

292

Bibliography

ma’oz, Zvi U.. Baniyas in the Greco-Roman Period: A History Based on the Excavations. archaostyle scientific research series 3. Qazrin: archaostyle, 2007. . Baniyas, the Roman Temples. archaostyle scientific research series 8. Qazrin: archaostyle, 2009. maraval, Pierre. Lieux saints et pélerinages d’Orient: Histoire et géographie des origines à la conquête arabe. Paris: Cerf, 1985. . “les itinéraires de pèlerinage en orient (entre le 4e et le 7e s.).” Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum, Ergänzungsband 20.1 (1995): 291–300. markus, robert a. The End of Ancient Christianity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. mathisen, ralph W. “emperors, Consuls, and Patricians: some Problems of Personal Preference, Precedence, and Protocol.” Byzantinische Forschungen 17 (1991): 173–90. mathews, e. g., Jr. “‘on solitaries’: ephrem or isaac?” Le Muséon 103 (1990): 91-110. matthews, John f. Laying Down the Law: A Study of the Theodosian Code. new haven and london: Yale University Press, 2000. may, georg. “Das lehrverfahren gegen eutyches im november des Jahres 448: Zur Vorgeschichte des Konzils von Chalkedon.” Annuarium Historiae Conciliorum 21 (1989): 1–61. mcgowan, andrew. Ascetic Eucharists: Food and Drink in Early Christian Ritual Meals. oxford: oxford University Press, 1999. mcguckin, John a. “nestorius and the Political factions of fifth-Century Byzantium: factors in his Personal Downfall.” Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 78.3 (1996): 7–21. menze, Volker. “The Dark side of holiness: Barsauma the ‘roasted’ and the invention of a Jewish Jerusalem.” in Motions of Late Antiquity: Essays on Religion, Politics, and Society in Honour of Peter Brown, ed. Jamie Kreiner and helmut reimitz, 231–48. Cultural encounters in late antiquity and the middle ages 4. Turnhout: Brepols, 2016. . “The Power of the eucharist in early medieval syria: grant for salvation or magical medication?” in Prayer and Worship in Eastern Christianities, 5th to 11th Centuries, ed. Brouria Bitton-ashkelony and Derek Krueger, 116–31. london and new York: routledge, 2017. michel, anne. Les églises d’époques byzantine et umayyade de Jordanie (provinces d’Arabie et de Palestine): Ve–VIIIe siècle; Typologie architecturale et aménagements liturgiques (avec catalogue des monuments). Bibliothèque de l’antiquité Tardive 2. Turnhout: Brepols, 2001. millar, fergus. The Roman Near East 31 BC–AD 337. Cambridge, ma: harvard University Press, 1993. . “ethnic identity in the roman near east, 325–450: language, religion, and Culture.” in Identities in the Eastern Mediterranean in Antiquity, ed. graeme W. Clarke, 158–76. mediterranean archaeology 11. sydney: University of sydney, 1998. . “Christian emperors, Christian Church, and the Jews of the Diaspora in the greek east, a.D. 379–450.” in millar, The Greek World, the Jews, and the East, 3:457–86. Chapel hill: University of north Carolina Press, 2006. . A Greek Roman Empire: Power and Belief under Theodosius II (408–450). sather Classical lectures 64. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2006. . “The Jews of the graeco-roman Diaspora between Paganism and Christianity, a.D. 312–438.” in millar, The Greek World, the Jews, and the East, 3:432–56. Chapel hill: University of north Carolina Press, 2006.

Bibliography

293

. “Theodoret of Cyrrhus: a syrian in greek Dress?” in From Rome to Constantinople: Studies in Honour of Averil Cameron, ed. hagit amirav and Bas ter haar romeny, 105– 26. late antique history and religion 19. leuven: Peeters, 2007. . “rebuilding the Jerusalem Temple: Pagan, Jewish, and Christian Concepts.” Vestnik Drevei Istorii 264 (2008): 19–37. . “The syriac acts of the second Council of ephesus (449).” in Chalcedon in Context: Church Councils, 400–700, ed. richard Price and mary Whitby, 45–69. liverpool: liverpool University Press, 2009. . “The Palestinian Context of rabbinic Judaism.” in Rabbinic Texts and the History of Late Roman Palestine, ed. martin goodman and Philip alexander, 25–49. oxford: oxford University Press, 2011. . Religion, Language, and Community in the Roman Near East: Constantine to Mohammed. oxford: oxford University Press, 2013. milson, David. Art and Architecture of the Synagogue in Late Antique Palestine: In the Shadow of the Church. ancient Judaism and early Christianity 65. leiden: Brill, 2006. moawad, samuel. “The relationship of st. shenoute of atripe with his Contemporary Patriarchs of alexandria.” in Christianity and Monasticism in Upper Egypt, vol. 1, ed. gawdat gabra and hany n. Takla, 107–19. Cairo and new York: american University in Cairo Press, 2008. moosa, matti. The Maronites in History. syracuse: syracuse University Press, 1986. moreno, alain. “hieron: The ancient sanctuary at the mouth of the Black sea.” Hesperia 77 (2008): 655–708. moss, Yonatan. Incorruptible Bodies: Christology, Society, and Authority in Late Antiquity. Christianity in late antiquity. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2016. müller, andreas e. “Documents: imperial Chrysobulls.” in The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies, ed. elizabeth Jeffreys, 129–35. oxford: oxford University Press, 2008. nallbani, etleva. “la synagogue antique d’anchiasmos à saranda, en albanie.” in L’archéologie du judaïsme en France et en Europe, ed. Paul salmona and laurence sigal, 63–73. Paris: la Découverte, 2011. nau, françois. “Deux episodes de l’histoire juive sous Théodose ii (423 et 438) d’après la Vie de Barsauma le syrien.” Revue des Études Juives 83 (1927): 184–206. . “sur la synagogue de rabbat moab (422) et un mouvement sioniste favorisé par l’impératrice eudocie (438), d’après la vie de Barsauma le syrien.” Journal Asiatique 210 (1927): 189–92. . “les belles actions de mar rabboula, évêque d’edesse de 412 au 7 août 435.” Revue de l’Histoire de Religions 52 (1931): 97–135. nauroy, gérard. Exégçse et création littéraire chez Ambroise de Milan: L’exemple du De Ioseph patriarcha. Collection des Études augustiniennes 181. Paris: institute d’Études augustiniennes, 2007. naveh, Joseph. On Stone and Mosaic: The Aramaic and Hebrew Inscriptions from Ancient Synagogues. Jerusalem: israel exploration society, 1978 [in hebrew]. netzer, ehud, and gideon foerster. “The synagogue at saranda, albania.” Qadmoniot 38 (2005): 45–53 [in hebrew]. newman, hillel. “Jerome and the Jews.” PhD diss., hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1997.

294

Bibliography

norton, Peter. Episcopal Elections (250–600): Hierarchy and Popular Will in Late Antiquity. oxford: oxford University Press, 2007. olszaniec, szymon. Prosopographical Studies on the Court Elite in the Roman Empire (4th Century AD). Torún: nicolaus Copernicus University Press, 2013. oppenheimer, aharon. Between Rome and Babylon: Studies in Jewish Leadership and Society. Texts and studies in ancient Judaism 10, ed. nili oppenheimer. Tübingen: mohr siebeck, 2005. ousterhout, robert. “The Temple, the sepulchre, and the martyrion of the savior (the relationship of the holy sepulchre and the Temple of Jerusalem manifested in Writings, Ceremonies, and architecture).” Gesta 29 (1990): 44–53. . “new Temples and new solomons: The rhetoric of Byzantine architecture.” in The Old Testament in Byzantium, ed. Paul magdalino and robert s. nelson, 223–54. Washington, DC: Dumbarton oaks, 2010. Palmer, andrew. Monk and Mason on the Tigris Frontier: The Early History of T. ur ‘Abdin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. . “The West-syrian monastic founder Bars. awmo: a historical review of the scholarly literature.” in Orientalia Christiana: Festschrift für Hubert Kaufhold zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. Peter Bruns and heinz o. luthe, 399–413. eichstätter Beiträge zum Christlichen orient 3. Wiesbaden: harrassowitz, 2013. . “a Tale of Two synods: The archimandrite Barsumas at ephesus in 449 and at Chalcedon in 451.” Journal of Eastern Christian Studies 66 (2014): 37–61. Papadogiannakis, Yannis. “a Debate about the rebuilding of the Temple in sixth-Century Byzantium.” in Antiquity in Antiquity: Jewish and Christian Pasts in the Greco-Roman World, ed. gregg gardner and Kevin l. osterloh, 372–82. Tübingen: mohr siebeck, 2008. . Christianity and Hellenism in the Fifth-Century Greek East: Theodoret’s Apologetics against the Greeks in Context. hellenic studies 49. Washington, DC: Center for hellenic studies, 2012. Pásztori-Kupán, istván. Theodoret of Cyrrhus. london: routledge, 2006. Patlagean, Évelyne. “ancienne hagiographie byzantine et histoire sociale.” Annales 23 (1968): 106–26. Published in english in Saints and Their Cults, ed. stephen Wilson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), 101–21. . Pauvreté économique et pauvreté sociale à Byzance 4e-7e siècles. Paris: mouton, 1977. Patrich, Joseph. “Church, state, and the Transformation of Palestine—The Byzantine Period (324–640 Ce).” in The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land, ed. Thomas e. levy, 470–73. london: leicester University Press, 1995. . Sabas, Leader of Palestinian Monasticism: A Comparative Study in Eastern Monasticism, Fourth to Seventh Centuries. Washington, DC: Dumbarton oaks, 1995. Payne smith, r., and J. Payne smith. A Compendious Syriac Dictionary Founded upon the Thesaurus Syriacus of R. Payne Smith, D D. oxford: Clarendon Press, 1903. Penella, robert J. “emperor Julian, the Temple of Jerusalem, and the god of the Jews.” Koinonia 23 (1999): 16–31. Pergami, federico. Amministrazione della giustizia e interventi imperiali nel sistema processuale della tarda antichità. milan: giuffrè, 2007. Perrone, lorenzo. La chiesa di Palestina e le controversie cristologiche: Dal Concilio di Efeso (431) al secondo Concilio di Costantinopoli (553). Brescia: Paideia, 1980.

Bibliography

295

Peters, francis e. Jerusalem: The Holy City in the Eyes of Chroniclers, Visitors, Pilgrims, and Prophets from the Days of Abraham to the Beginnings of Modern Times. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1985. Price, richard. “The Council of Chalcedon (451): a narrative.” in Chalcedon in Context: Church Councils (400–700), ed. richard Price and mary Whitby, 70–92. liverpool: liverpool University Press, 2009. Pummer, reinhard. “samaritan material remains and archaeology.” in The Samaritans, ed. alan D. Crown, 135–77. Tübingen: J.C.B. mohr [Paul siebeck], 1989. . “The greek Bible and the samaritans.” Revue des Études Juives 157 (1998): 269–358. . “how to Tell a samaritan synagogue from Jewish synagogue.” Biblical Archaeology Review 24 (1998): 24–35. . “samaritan synagogues and Jewish synagogues: similarities and Differences.” in Jews, Christians, and Polytheists in the Ancient Synagogue: Cultural Interaction during the Greco-Roman Period, ed. steven fine, 118–60. london and new York: routledge, 1999. . “samaritanism in Caesarea maritima.” in Religious Rivalries and the Struggle for Success in Caesarea Maritima, ed. Terence l. Donaldson, 181–202. Waterloo, on: Wilfrid laurier University Press, 2000. . Early Christian Authors on Samaritans and Samaritanism: Texts, Translations and Commentary. Texts and studies in ancient Judaism 92. Tübingen: mohr siebeck, 2002. . “The samaritans and Their Pentateuch.” in The Pentateuch as Torah: New Models for Understanding Its Promulgation and Acceptance, ed. gary n. Knoppers and Bernard m. levinson, 237–69. Winona lake, in: eisenbrauns, 2007. . The Samaritans in Flavius Josephus. Texts and studies in ancient Judaism 129. Tübingen: mohr siebeck, 2009. Purvis, James D. “Joseph in the samaritan Tradition.” in Studies on the Testament of Moses, ed. george W. e. nickelsburg, 147–53. missoula, mT: society of Biblical literature, 1975. rabello, alfredo m. Giustiniano, Ebrei e Samaritani: Alla luce delle fonti storico-letterarie, ecclesiastiche e giuridiche I-II. monografie del vocabolario di giustiniano 1. milan: giuffrè, 1987. . “The samaritans in Justinian’s Corpus Iuris Civilis.” Israel Law Review 31 (1997): 724–43. reprinted in rabello, The Jews in the Roman Empire: Legal Problems from Herod to Justinian, Variorum Collected studies series 645 (aldershot: ashgate, 2000), 724–43. rapp, Claudia. “Byzantine hagiographers as antiquarians, seventh to Tenth Centuries.” in Bosphorus: Essays in Honour of Cyril Mango, ed. stephanos efthymiadas, Claudia rapp, and Dimitris Tsougarakis, 31–44. Byzantinische forschungen 21. amsterdam: hakkert, 1995. . “storytelling as spiritual Communication in early greek hagiography: The Use of Diegesis.” Journal of Early Christian Studies 6 (1998): 431–48. . “The old Testament models for emperors in early Byzantium.” in The Old Testament in Byzantium, ed. Paul magdalino and robert s. nelson, 175–98. Washington, DC: Dumbarton oaks, 2010. . “The origins of hagiography and the literature of early monasticism: Purpose and genre between Tradition and innovation.” in Unclassical Traditions, vol. 1, Alternatives to the Classical Past in Late Antiquity, ed. Christopher Kelly, richard flower, and michael

296

Bibliography

s. Williams, 119–30. supplement to Cambridge Classical Journal 34. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. reeg, gottfried. Die Ortsnamen Israels nach der rabbinischen Literatur. Tübinger atlas des Vorderen orients, Beiheft 51. Wiesbaden: Dr. ludwig reichert, 1989. regulski, ilona, Kim Duistermaat, and Peter Verkinderen, eds. Seals and Sealing Practices in the Near East: Developments in Administration and Magic from Prehistory to the Islamic Period. orientalia lovaniensia analecta 219. louvain: Peeters, 2012. ridley, ronald T. “anonymity in the Vita Constantini.” Byzantion 50 (1980): 241–58. roth, Jonathan P. “Jews and the roman army: Perceptions and realities.” in The Impact of the Roman Army (200 B.C.–A.D. 476): Economic, Social, Politial, Religious, and Cultural Aspects, ed. lukas de Blois and elio lo Cascio, 409–20. impact of empire 6. leiden: Brill, 2007. roth-gerson, lea. The Greek Inscriptions from the Synagogues in Eretz-Israel. Jerusalem: Yad izhak Ben-Zvi, 1987 [in hebrew]. rubenson, samuel. “Power and Poverty in early monasticism.” in Prayer and Spirituality in the Early Church, vol. 5, Poverty and Riches, ed. geoffrey D. Dunn, David luckensmeyer, and lawrence Cross, 91–110. strathfield, nsW: st. Pauls Publications, 2009. rubin, Zeev. “Christianity in Byzantine Palestine—missionary activity and religious Coercion.” in The Jerusalem Cathedra: Studies in the History, Archaeology, Geography, Ethnography of the Land of Israel, ed. lee i. levine, 3:87–113. Jerusalem and Detroit: Wayne state University Press, 1983. . “Porphyrius of gaza and the Conflict between Christianity and Paganism in southern Palestine.” in Sharing the Sacred: Religious Contacts and Conflicts in the Holy Land, First-Fifteenth Centuries CE, ed. arieh Kofsky and guy g. stroumsa, 31–66. Jerusalem: Yad izhak Ben-Zvi, 1998. rutgers, leonard V. Making Myths: Jews in Early Christian Identity Formation. leuven: Peeters, 2009. safrai, Zeev. The Missing Century: Palestine in the Fifth Century; Growth and Decline. Palaestina antiqua 9. leuven: Peeters, 1998. sandwell, isabella. Religious Identity in Late Antiquity: Greeks, Jews, and Christians in Antioch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. saradi, helen. “The Christianization of Pagan Temples in the greek hagiographical Texts.” in From Temple to Church: Destruction and Renewal of Local Cultic Topography in Late Antiquity, ed. Johannes hahn, stephen emmel, and Ulrich gotter, 113–34. religions of the graeco-roman World 163. leiden: Brill, 2008. schick, robert. The Christian Communities of Palestine from Byzantine to Islamic Rule: A Historical and Archaelogical Study. studies in late antiquity and early islam 2. Princeton, nJ: Darwin Press, 1995. schmitt, götz. Siedlungen Palästinas in griechisch-römischer Zeit. Ostjordanland, Negeb und (in Auswahl) Westjordanland. Wiesbaden: Dr. ludwig reichert, 1995. scholten, helga. Der Eunuch in Kaisernähe: Zur politischen und sozialen Bedeutung des praepositus sacri cubiculi im 4. und 5. Jahrhundert n. Chr. frankfurt: Peter lang, 1995. schor, adam m. Theodoret’s People: Social Networks and Religious Conflict in Late Roman Syria. Transformation of the Classical heritage 48. Berkeley and los angeles: University of California Press, 2011.

Bibliography

297

schwartz, Daniel. “religious Violence and eschatology in the syriac Julian romance.” Journal of Early Christian Studies 19 (2011): 565–87. schwartz, eduard. Der Prozess des Eutyches. munich: Bayerische akademie der Wissenschaften, 1929. schwartz, Joshua. Lod (Lydda), Israel: From Its Origins through the Byzantine Period, 5600 B.C.E.–640 C.E. oxford: Tempus reparatum, 1991. . “John the Baptist, the Wilderness and the samarian mission.” in Studies in Historical Geography and Biblical Historiography Presented to Zeccharia Kallai, ed. gershon galil and moshe Weinfeld, 104–17. supplements to Vetus Testamentum 81. leiden: Brill, 2000. scipioni, luigi. Nestorio e il concilio de Efeso. studia Patristica mediolanensia 1. milan: Vita e. Pensiero, 1974. seeck, otto. Regesten der Kaiser und Päpste für die Jahre 311 bis 476 n. Chr. Vorarbeit zu einer Prosopographie der christlichen Kaiserzeit. stuttgart: metzler, 1919. séguy, Jean. “Philippe escolan, Monachisme et Église: Le monachisme syrien du IVe au VIIe siècle; Un monachisme charismatique.” Archives de Sciences Sociales des Religions 116 (2001): 93–156. shahid, irfan. Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth Century. Washington, DC: Dumbarton oaks research library, 2002. shepardson, Christine. “interpreting the ninevites’ repentance: Jewish and Christian exegetes in late antique mesopotamia.” Hugoye 14.2 (2011): 249–77. siebigs, gereon. Kaiser Leo I: Das oströmische Reich in den ersten drei Jahren seiner Regierung (457–460 n. Chr.). Beiträge zur altertumskunde 276. Berlin and new York: de gruyter, 2010. simon, marcel. Verus Israel: Études sur les relations entre chrétiens et juifs dans l’empire romain (135–425). Paris: e. de Boccard, 1948. sivan, hagith. Palestine in Late Antiquity. oxford: oxford University Press, 2008. sizgorich, Thomas. Violence and Belief in Late Antiquity: Militant Devotion in Christianity and Islam. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008. smallwood, e. mary. The Jews under Roman Rule: From Pompey to Diocletian; A Study in Political Relations. leiden: Brill, 1976. smith, r. r. r. “statue Practice in the late roman empire: numbers, Costumes, and style.” in The Last Statues of Antiquity, ed. r. r. r. smith and Bryan Ward-Perkins, 1–27. oxford: oxford University Press, 2016. sokoloff, michael. A Dictionary of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic of the Byzantine Period. ramat gan: Bar ilan University Press, 1990. spier, Jeffrey. Late Antique and Early Christian Gems. spätantike, frühes Christentum, Byzanz; reihe B, studien und Perspektiven 20. Wiesbaden: reichert, 2007. stemberger, günter. Juden und Christen im Heiligen Land: Palästina unter Konstantin und Theodosius. munich: C.h. Beck 1987. revised english version: Jews and Christians in the Holy Land: Palestine in the Fourth Century (edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000). . Introduction to the Talmud and Midrash. Trans. markus Bockmuehl. edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1996. . “Jewish-Christian Contacts in galilee (fifth to seventh Centuries).” in Sharing the Sacred: Religious Contacts and Conflicts in the Holy Land, First-Fifteenth Centuries

298

Bibliography

CE, ed. arieh Kofsky and guy g. stroumsa, 131–45. Jerusalem: Yad izhak Ben Zvi, 1998. . “Christians and Jews in Byzantine Palestine.” in Christians and Christianity in the Holy Land, ed. ora limor and guy g. stroumsa, 293–319. Turnhout: Brepols, 2005. reprinted in stemberger, Judaica Minora II, Texts and studies in ancient Judaism 138 (Tübingen: mohr siebeck, 2010), 124–45. . Juden und Christen im spätantiken Palästina. hans-lietzmann-Vorlesungen 9. Berlin: de gruyter, 2007. stenhouse, Paul. “reflections on the samaritan Belief in an after-life.” in Samaria, Samarians, Samaritans, ed. József Zsengellér, 245–60. studia Judaica 66 = studia samaritana 6. Berlin: de gruyter, 2011. steppa, Jan-eric. John Rufus and the World Vision of Anti-Chalcedonian Culture. Piscataway, nJ: gorgias Press, 2002. stroumsa, guy g. “ ‘Vetus Israel’: les juifs dans la littérature hiérosolymitaine d’époque byzantine.” Revue de l’Histoire de Religions 205 (1988): 115–31. Talbert, richard J. a., ed. Barrington Atlas of the Greek and Roman World. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000. . Rome’s World: The Peutinger Map Reconsidered. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. Thomson, herbert. “Dioscorus and shenoute.” in Recueil d’études des égyptologiques, 367– 76. Paris: Édouard Champion, 1922. Todt, Klaus-Peter, and Bernd a. Vest. Syria (Syria Prōtē, Syria Deutera, Syria Euphratēsia). 3 vols. Tabula imperii Byzantini 15. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen akademie der Wissenschaften, 2015. Triebel, lothar. “Die angebliche synagoge der makkabäischen märtyrer in antiochia am orontes.” Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum 9 (2006): 464–95. Trombley, frank r. Hellenic Religion and Christianization, c. 370—529 A.D. 2 vols. religions of the graeco-roman World 115. leiden: Brill, 1993/94. Tsafrir, Yoram, leah di segni, and Judith green, eds. Tabula Imperii Romani: Iudaea Palaestina. Jerusalem: israel academy of sciences and humanities, 1994. Tsedaka, Benyamim. “reevaluation of samaritan studies Due to the new Discoveries in excavations.” in Die Samaritaner und die Bibel, ed. Jörg frey, Ursula schattner-rieser, and Konrad schmid, 419–26. studia Judaica 70 = studia samaritana 7. Berlin: de gruyter, 2012. Ueding, leo. “Die Kanones von Chalkedon in ihrer Bedeutung für mönchtum und Klerus.” in Das Konzil von Chalkedon: Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. 2, ed. alois grillmeier and heinrich Bacht, 569–676. Würzburg: echter, 1953. Urbainczyk, Theresa. Theodoret of Cyrrhus: The Bishop and the Holy Man. ann arbor: University of michigan Press, 2002. van rompay, lucas. “Barsawmo.” in Gorgias Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Syriac Heritage, ed. sebastian P. Brock et al., 59. Piscataway, nJ: gorgias Press, 2011. van Uytfanghe, marc. “l’hagiographie: Un ‘genre’ chrétien ou antique tardif?” Analecta Bollandiana 111 (1993): 135–88. Vööbus, arthur. “la vie d’alexandre en grec: Un témoin d’une biographie inconnue de rabbula écrite en syriaque.” Contributions of the Baltic University 61 (1948): 1–16.

Bibliography

299

. History of Asceticism in the Syrian Orient: A Contribution to the History of Culture in the Near East. Vols. 1–2. CsCo 184 and 197. louvain: secrétariat du CorpussCo, 1958 and 1960. . “solution du problème de l’auteur de la ‘lettre à gemellinus, évêque de Perrhé’.” L’Orient Syrien 7 (1962): 297–306. Walker, Peter W. l. Holy City, Holy Places? Christian Attitudes to Jerusalem and the Holy Land in the Fourth Century. oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990. Watts, edward. “Theodosius ii and his legacy in anti-Chalcedonian Communal memory.” in Theodosius II: Rethinking the Roman Empire in Late Antiquity, ed. Christopher Kelly, 269–84. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013. Weingarten, susan. The Saint’s Saints: Hagiography and Geography in Jerome. ancient Judaism and early Christianity 53. leiden and Boston: Brill, 2005. Weksler-Bdolah, shlomit. “a Plan of Aelia Capitolina in the 4th C. a.D.” in Roman Jerusalem: A New Old City, ed. gideon avni and guy D. stiebels, 7–10. Journal of roman archaeology, suppl. ser. 105. Portsmouth, ri: Journal of roman archaeology, 2017. Wharton, annabel J. Refiguring the Post Classical City: Dura Europos, Jerash, Jerusalem, and Ravenna. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Wiemer, hans-Ulrich. “akklamationen im spätrömischen reich: Zur Typologie und funktion eines Kommunikationsrituals.” Archiv für Kulturgeschichte 86 (2004): 27–74. Wilken, robert l. John Chrysostom and the Jews: Rhetoric and Reality in the Late 4th Century. The Transformation of the Classical heritage 4. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983. . “The restoration of israel in Biblical Prophecy: Christian and Jewish responses.” in To See Ourselves as Others See Us: Christians, Jews, “Others” in Late Antiquity, ed. Jacob neusner and ernest s. frerichs, 443–72. Chico, Ca: scholars Press, 1985. . The Land Called Holy: Palestine in Christian History and Thought. new haven and london: Yale University Press, 1992. Wilkinson, John. Jerusalem Pilgrims before the Crusades. Warminster: aris and Phillips, 2002. Winkler, Dietmar W. “monophysites.” in Late Antiquity: A Guide to the Postclassical World, ed. glen W. Bowersock, Peter Brown, and oleg grabar, 586–88. Cambridge, ma and london: harvard University Press, 1999. Wipszycka, ewa. “les formes institutionnelles et les formes d’activité économique du monachisme égyptien.” in Foundations of Power and Conflicts of Authority in Late Antique Monasticism, ed. alberto Camlani and giovanni filoramo, 109–55. orientalia lovaniensia analecta 157. louvain: Peeters, 2007. Wood, Philip. “We Have No King but Christ”: Christian Political Thought in Greater Syria on the Eve of the Arab Conquest (c. 400–585). oxford: oxford University Press, 2010. Young, robin D. “Xeniteia according to evagrius of Pontus.” in Ascetic Culture: Essays in Honor of Philip Rousseau, ed. Blake leyerle and robin D. Young, 229–52. notre Dame, in: notre Dame University Press, 2013. Zangenberg, Jürgen. ΣΑΜΑΡΕΙΑ: Antike Quellen zur Geschichte und Kultur der Samaritaner in deutscher Übersetzung. Texte und arbeiten zum neutestamentlichen Zeitalter 15. Tübingen and Basel: a. francke, 1998.

300

Bibliography

. “Between Jerusalem and the galilee: samaria in the Time of Jesus.” in Jesus and Archaeology, ed. James h. Charlesworth, 393–432. grand rapids, mi: eerdmans, 2006. Zayadine, fawzi. “Deux inscriptions grecques de rabbat moab (areopolis).” Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 16 (1971): 71–76. Zuckerman, Constantine. Du village à l’empire: Autour du registre fiscal d’Aphroditô. Paris: association des amis du centre d’histoire et civilisation de Byzance, 2004.

c ontribu tors

daniel f. caner is a late antique social and cultural historian. Currently associate Professor of near eastern languages and Cultures at indiana University, he is author of Wandering, Begging Monks: Spiritual Authority and the Promotion of Monasticism in Late Antiquity (2002) and a coauthor of History and Hagiography from the Late Antique Sinai (2010). simon corcoran is lecturer in ancient history at newcastle University (UK), and codirector of the Projet Volterra roman law project based at University College london. he is author of the award-winning The Empire of the Tetrarchs: Imperial Pronouncements and Government, AD 284–324 (2000), and has researched and published extensively on late roman administrative and legal history. in 2010 he and a colleague identified some late antique parchment fragments as the only surviving remains of the lost roman legal compilation the Codex Gregorianus. jan willem drijvers is associate Professor in ancient history at the University of groningen. he has published extensively on a variety of topics concerning the late antique period, including monographs on the empress helena and her finding of the True Cross and Cyril, fourth-century bishop of Jerusalem. he was a member of the Dutch team that wrote the philological and historical commentaries on ammianus marcellinus. johannes hahn holds the Chair in ancient history at the University of münster, germany. his research interests mainly comprise the roman empire and late antiquity. he has published extensively on the relationship of society and religion in the roman empire, especially on religious conflict and religious violence, and is editor of several volumes, including Expropriation and Destruction of Synagogues in Late Antiquity (forthcoming). cornelia b. horn holds the Chair in Christian oriental and Byzantine studies at the University of halle-Wittenberg, germany. her research interests comprise the reception and transmission history of canonical, apocryphal, and hagiographic writings in and 301

302

contributors

between Judaism, oriental Christianity, and islam; syriac- and arabic-speaking Christianity; the history of asceticism and monasticism; and the historical and critical reconstruction of social and cultural history, especially with regard to the lives of women and children, in the wider near east. reuven kiperwasser obtained a PhD from Bar ilan University (2005). he is a research fellow at ariel University and at the melton Center for Jewish education, hebrew University of Jerusalem. his research focuses on rabbinic narrative and transcultural dynamics in late antiquity. his most recent studyis “narrative Bricolage and Cultural hybrids in rabbinic Babylonia: on the narratives of seduction and the Topos of light,” in The Aggada of the Bavli and Its Cultural World, Brown Judaic studies (2018). volker menze is associate Professor of late antique history at the Central european University in Budapest/Vienna. his publications include Justinian and the Making of the Syrian Orthodox Church (2008); he is currently writing a monograph, The Last Pharaoh of Alexandria: Patriarch Dioscorus and Ecclesiastical Politics in the Later Roman Empire. serge ruzer obtained a PhD from the hebrew University of Jerusalem (1996), where he teaches in the Department of Comparative religion and is a research fellow at the Center for the study of Christianity. his research focuses on the Jewish matrix of early Christianity and early syriac literature. The latter topic was addressed, inter alia, in Syriac Idiosyncrasies: Theology and Hermeneutics in Early Syriac Literature (2010), which he coauthored with aryeh Kofsky. günter stemberger is Professor emeritus in the Department of Jewish studies at the University of Vienna, specializing in rabbinic literature and the history of Judaism in late antiquity. his main publications are Jews and Christians in the Holy Land: Palestine in the Fourth Century (2000) and Einleitung in Talmud und Midrasch, 9th ed. (2011).

In dex

abraham (ascetic), 11, 53–55, 68, 189 acacius of melitene (bishop), 60, 211–12 alexander of hierapolis (bishop), 16 alexander the sleepless (ascetic), 4–5, 24, 150 apostolikos aner, 156 biography, 154–55 liturgical innovations, 156 Alexander the Sleepless, Life of apologetics, 155 “apostolic” paradigm, 153–54 amantius (eunuch), 26 ambrose of milan (bishop), 80 anachoresis, 69 anatolius (patrikios), 45 anchorite (anachōrētē΄s), 154, 163, 165–66 anti-Judaism, 1, 5–6, 91, 97–103, 132–33 antioch, 174, 213, 228, 258 Council of, 59, 173, 240 see of, 27–28 Antony the Stylite, Life of, 52–53 arabia, x, 66, 78, 79, 83, 132, 190, 200, 247 archimandrites of the east, 59–60 areopolis. See reqem d-gaya armenia, 199, 267, 269 ascetic(s) “Chief of the ascetics,” 51 clothing, 61–63; iron tunic, 62–63 hair, 63–64, 244 places of religious practice, 65

ascetism criticism, 148, 153 monasticism (abilutā), 163–64; outward appearance, 163 naziruta (ascetic practice), 164 asclepiodotus (praefectus praetorio), 80–81, 96 Baba rabba, 140 Babatha, archive of, 85 Barhebraeus (chronicler), 11 Barsauma asceticism, 8–9, 14, 51, 58, 105, 163–68, 190–99; hardship (uls. anē), 162–63, 166–67, 190–91, 195–96 birth, 11, 188 cave monastery (melitene), 2, 177, 198, 207, 222 childhood, 53–56, 68 clothing, 189–90, 206; iron tunic, 163, 194, 221 criticism, 66, 243 death, 11, 267–68 diet, 66, 162, 190–91, 194 disciples, 58, 195–98, 203, 209, 212–16, 221, 228, 230–34, 241–42, 259–61, 266 fasting, 66–68, 191 lifespan, 11 literary sources of, 175, 182 mourner/mourning, 163, 195 parallels, 99–103

303

304

Index

Barsauma (continued) posture, praying, 68, 191, 195 variations of name, 1 Barsauma, Life of architectural information, 127–30 audience, 168–69 composition, 162 date, 8–10, 89, 177–78 depiction of religious groups, 131–33 episodes in samaria, 121, 123, 126; first (§ 80), 123, 128, 131–32; second (§ 84), 123, 135–36 exorcism, 106, 202–3, 210–12, 222, 226, 250, 254, 257 historic value, 176, 180–81, 185 historicity, 73–74, 88, 94–96, 114–16, 123, 171–72, 174, 175–80, 182–84 intention/agenda, 168–69, 172–73, 176–78, 179–81 itinerary, 37–38 journeys to Jerusalem, 124; first, 74, 79, 89, 124, 189–90; second, 67–68, 74–76, 83, 89, 124–25, 199–200, —route, 74–76; third, 90, 106–7, 125, 173, 219–25, —route, 76, 219–20; fourth, 88, 90–91, 107–13, 147, 173, 227–36, —route, 76–77 journeys to Palestine: third, 145; voyage to, 76–77 miracles, 167, 172 modern historiography, 73–74 narrative strategies, 87, 113–16, 172–73, 177–78, 182, 184 negative evidence, 141–42 omissions, 174–75 parallels, 117–18, 162; biblical, 136–37 “penitential” paradigm, 153–54, 162–69 routes, 74–77, 124–26 samuel (possible author), 4, 8, 271 structure, 2–4 topographic accuracy, 124 Bassianus of ephesus (bishop), 47 Besa of atripe (abbot, hagiographer), 183 Bible, hebrew, 66 Book of steps, 153, 157 Caesarea (Palestine), 124, 125, 144, 233 Canaanites, new, 87 Cappadocia (province), 60, 211, 218 Carrhae (osrhoene), x, 125, 219 Cenobites, cenobium, 150, 154, 156, 166 Chalcedon canons of, 5

Council of, 15–19, 32–34, 39–41, 43–47, 55, 57, 143, 161, 171, 174, 179, 237, 245–46 Christological debate/controversy, 2, 20, 25–26, 34, 36, 112–14 Chrysaphius (eunuch), 15–16, 26 Claudias (augusta euphratensis), 215–18 Colonia Aelia Capitolina (cf. Jerusalem) Commagene (province), 180–82 Constantine (emperor), 115 Constantinople, 59, 213, 238, 240, 243–44, 249–54 monasteries, 161 conversion, religious, 133, 143–44, 147–48, 201–3, 221–22, 225 Count of the straits (komēs tōn stenōn), 41–42 Covenant, new, 133, 139 Cross, holy, 91, 98, 101–2 Cyprus, 220 Cyril of alexandria (bishop), 10, 16–17, 92, 183 Cyril of Jerusalem (bishop), 99 letter ascribed to, 99–100, 102 Cyril of scythopolis (hagiographer), 144, 147, 165–66 Daniel the stylite, 6 Daniel, Book of, 165, 107 Desert fathers/mothers, 63 diaspora, 82, 88, 90 Diatessaron, syriac Commentary on the, 63–64 Dionysius (saint), 265–66 Dioscorus of alexandria (bishop), 12, 14, 17–19, 26, 28, 32–34, 44, 56–57, 240, 247 doctrine of the two natures, 246, 248 Domnus of antioch (bishop), 12–13, 18, 27–28, 59, 238 edessa, 36, 38, 45 egypt, 17, 154 encaenia, feast of the, 98 ephesus i, Council of, 16–17, 26, 245 ephesus ii, Council of, 13–19, 26–38, 40–42, 45–46, 55–58, 171, 173–74, 178–79, 238–40 letters concerning, 28–38, 45–47 ephrem syrus/the syrian, 31, 63–66, 69–70, 98–99, 117 hymns on fasting, 66–67 eudocia (empress), 40, 54, 90–97, 106–7, 111, 134, 173, 178–80, 182, 222–24, 227–28, 230–33, 235 sojourns in the holy land, 92; first sojourn, 92, 222; second sojourn, 93, 222–23 eulogius (comes), letters to, 37 eunomius of nicomedia (bishop), 47 euphratensis (province), 37–38, 42, 149–53, 174

Index euphrates, 53, 189, 236, 264 eusebius (monk), 55–56 eusebius of Caesarea (bishop), 75, 83 Onomasticon, 75, 83, 199 eusebius of Dorylaeum (bishop), 14, 47, 56 eutyches (archimandrite), 14–18, 55–56 evagrius scholasticus (church historian), 165 evidence archaeological, 176 literary, 182 prosopographical, 176–77 ezra (the scribe), 66 fasting, 65–68, 71 flavia neapolis (cf. neapolis) flavian of Constantinople (bishop), 16, 18–19, 175 gaza, 154 gemellius of Perrhê (bishop), 11, 177, 149, 184, 192–93 Genesis Rabba, 116–18 gerizim, mount, 134, 138–41, 144 golgotha, 101, 106, 222 grazers (boskós), 164–65 gregory of nazianzus, 98 hagiography, 1–2, 4–7, 11, 24, 49, 124–26, 149–70, 172–85 narrative strategies, 1 syriac, 5, 7, 77 helena (empress), 91–92, 101–2 helpidius (comes), letters to, 37 herodes (king), 127 hesychia, 152, 154 historesantes, 159–61 holy land, 91–92 geography, 74–77 pilgrims’ routes, 78 religious distribution, 77–78 holy sepulchre, Church of the, 93, 97–98, 222 ibas of edessa (bishop), 17–18, 39, 59 ignatius of antioch (bishop), 51 illyria, 80 imitatio Christi, 137 inventio crucis, 101–2 isaac of antioch (homilist), 164–65 James of Cyrrhestica (saint), 58, 62–63, 151, 228 Jamnia (iudaea), 134 Jerusalem, 97, 173, 129, 143, 199–200, 222, 228–30, 232, 248

305

Church of stephen, 106 Jewish image of, 6 Pool of siloam, 108, 229 Short Description of (anon.), 110 Temple, solomon’s, 90, 95, 228–29 Temple of Jerusalem, 85, 132–33, 138–39; reconstruction, 98–100, 117–18 Temple mount, 90, 95–97, 108–11, 118, 178 Jesus, 136–37 Jews/Jewish ban to enter Jerusalem, 107, 114–15, 228 depiction of, 132–33 perception, 4, 115 priests (kahnē d-yudāye), 111–12 See also “anti-Judaism” John the Baptist, 52, 141 Church of, in sebaste, 141 John hyrcanus i (hasmonean ruler), 138 John i of antioch (bishop), 16, 27 John malalas (chronicler), 8–9, 41, 122, 140 John rufus (author), 38 John of Tella, Life of, 5 Jona, Book of, 76 Joseph (ascetic), 52, 187–88 Joseph (genesis), 31–32, 42 Joshua (biblical figure), 87 Joshua ben hananiah (rabbi), 116 Judas Kyriakos-legend, 101–2, 115 Julian the apostate (emperor), 98–100, 117, 178 Julian of halicarnassus (bishop), 8, Julian Romance, Syriac, 100, 102 Julianist controversy, 8–9. See Christological controversy Juvenal of Jerusalem (bishop), 13, 33–34, 37, 40, 56–57, 92–93, 143 karpophoriai (“fruit bearings”), 155, 157, 168 laodicea (syria), 220 lenten practices, 166 audience, 159 dating, 158 intention, 157–60 miracles, 159 parallels, 162 tradition, 161–62 leo i (bishop of rome), 48 leviticus, Book of, 52 maccabean brothers, 82–83 madaba (arabia), 75–77 magister officiorum, 43–45

306

Index

Marcellus, Life of, 160–61, 168–69 marcian (emperor), 4, 6, 19, 38–47, 173, 178, 244–53, 265–66, 268–70 mari of Qarrath (bishop), 66, 247 marneion (temple in gaza), 78, 87 maron (ascetic), 62 mary of egypt (saint), 62, 64 Life of, 64, 166 megistos huparchos, 42–43, 252 melania the Younger, 92 mesopotamia (province), 230 messalianism (heresy), 155, 157 metanoia, 165–66 miaphysitism, 16–17, 28, 45, 113–14 michael the syrian (bishop, historian), 11 models, biblical, 23, 42, 49, 63, 87–88, 150, 153, 172 monastic party, Cyrillian, 15–16 monasticism, 156–57 monks sleepless (akoimetai), 16, 85, 158–61 wandering (mshannyanē), 152 motif, religious apostolic, 156 being chosen, 53, 188 old Testament, 162 mourner (aβīlā), 53, 60–61, 65–66 master of, 51, 60, 187 neapolis (samaria), 127 nestorianism (heresy), 26, 45 nestorius of Constantinople (bishop), 13, 15–16, 33, 39, 57, 245, 249 nicaea, Council of, 253 nicomedia, 253–54 nilus of ancyra (monk), 151, 155–57 nomikos (teacher of law), 136–37 nomus (magister officiorum), 44 osrhoene (province), 174, 180–82 Pagans, depiction of, 132 Palestine, 172–73, 190, 200, 228 Palladius (praefectus praetorio), 43–44 Papos and lulianos (Jews of laodicea), 116–18 parakoimomenos tes sphendones (keeper of the signet), 30 patrikios, 42–45 Pentateuch, 121, 123, 136 Perrhê (syria/euphratensis), 149 Persia, 4, 100, 105, 155–58, 228, 243, 267, 269 Peter the iberian (ascetic), 5, 10

Petra, 75–77, 83, 86 Phoenicia (province), 190, 200 Photina, monastery, 228, 233 Porphyrius, Life of, 78, 87–88 Priscus of Panium (historian), 47 Procopius of Caesarea (historian), 9, 122, 133 Proterius of alexandria (bishop), 269–70 Protonike-legend, 102 Pulcheria (empress), 4, 15, 19, 39–40, 59, 93, 178, 247, 251–54 Qal’at sim’an (syria), 3 rabbat moab (arabia), 75, 83, 87, 141, 204 synagogue of, 83–86, 89, 204; appearance, 84, 204; archaeological evidence, 84–86, rabbula of edessa (bishop), 5, 16, 67, 149–50, 158, 177, 184 reqem d-gaya (arabia), 6, 74–76, 124–25, 200–202 mountain of the roots (melitene), 193 rufinus of aquileia (church historian), 102 rufinus of samosata (bishop), 12 sacra (imperial letters), 27–28, 39, 240, 266 samaria (sebaste/Palestina i), 74, 225. See also sebaste samosata (syria), 188–89, 227, 263–64 samaritan(s), 180, 190, 221–22, 225 archeological evidence, 138–40 archeology of synagogues, 131 chronicles, 122 crypto-, 133 great revolt (484 c.e.), 134, 143–45 inscriptions, 122 interreligious contact, 135 presence in the near east, 132 sanctuary, 138–39 sources, 122 uprising (529 c.e.), 144–45, 147 seal ring, 29–31 sebaste (samaria/Palestina i), 123, 125, 141, 221 aqueduct, 129–30 architecture, 129–30 topography, 127–30 seleucia apamea (syria), 181 seraph (angel), 68–69, 219 severus of antioch (bishop), 8, 51 shenoute of atripe (abbot), 17, 183–84 simeon the stylite (ascetic), 3–5, 10, 12, 74, 107, 125, 151, 169, 199–200, 207

Index

307

sinai, 77 mount, 3, 74, 77, 124, 200 sion, mount, 228, 235 socrates (church historian), 59 sozomen (church historian), 59, 164 space, sacred, 93, 97–99, 104–20, 170 statues, imperial, 48 stephen the protomartyr, 92–93, 96 Church of, 93 synagogue(s) apamea, 82, 207 gerasa, 81–82, 86 conversion, 81–83, 86 destruction, 79–83, 86–87 imperial law, 89 imperial protection, 95–96 Jewish, 79–83, 204, 207 samaritan, 79, 200, 221–22 syria, 174, 226, 254, 269

Theodosius (monk), 143 Theodosius ii (emperor), 4, 6, 11, 12–13, 16–17, 25–40, 56–61, 63–64, 81, 91, 96, 168, 173– 74, 177–79, 181, 227, 235, 238–44, 252 ring(s) of, 28–32, 239 Theophanes Confessor (chronicler), 15 theophoros, 51

Tabernacles, feast of (Sukkot), 107–8, 116, 229 Tell er-ras (temple for Zeus), 138 Tenedos (asia), 41–42 Theodore anagnostes (church historian), 11, 17–48 Theodoret of Cyrrhus (bishop and author), 16, 18, 39–40, 53, 61–63, 151–52, 161, 265 History of the monks of Syria, 4, 53, 62, 151–52, 160

weeping (bāxē hwā), 53

Valentinian iii (emperor), 46–49, 178, 222, 239–40, 249–50 Via nova Traiana, 75–77, 125, 200, 203 Vincomalus (magister officiorum), 43–44 violence, religious, 20–21, 79–80, 87, 143–45, 172–74, 178–84, 190, 230–33, 243, 248, 259–62, 269 desecration, 141 destruction of religious sites, 130–31, 144–45, 200, 205, 207 iconoclasm, 203, 206

Zachariah of samosata (bishop), 4, 12, 27, 176–77, 181, 191, 237 Zachariah rhetor (chronicler), 67 Zeugma (syria), 181, 218 Zionist movement, 95 Zoara (arabia), Jewish community of, 85–86

Founded in 1893,

University of California Press publishes bold, progressive books and journals on topics in the arts, humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences—with a focus on social justice issues—that inspire thought and action among readers worldwide. The UC Press Foundation raises funds to uphold the press’s vital role as an independent, nonprofit publisher, and receives philanthropic support from a wide range of individuals and institutions—and from committed readers like you. To learn more, visit ucpress.edu/supportus.