A Paris Fragment of Pseudo-ChrysostomAuthor(s): Edgar J. GoodspeedSource: The American Journal of Theology, Vol. 12, No. 3 (Jul., 1908), pp. 443-444Published by: The University of Chicago PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3154594 .

Accessed: 17/05/2014 04:53

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to TheAmerican Journal of Theology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.107 on Sat, 17 May 2014 04:53:06 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CRITICAL NOTES

A PARIS FRAGMENT OF PSEUDO-CHRYSOSTOM

The Greek cursive manuscript, Coislin. 299, in the Bibliothbque Nation- ale, Paris, has prefixed to it a leaf from an earlier and larger uncial codex, which has apparently remained unidentified. Coislin. 299 is a thirteenth- (or, according to Montfaucon, eleventh-) century manuscript containing works of various Greek Fathers-Athanasius, Dionysius, Gregory, Cyril, and others. The uncial leaf has been folded once, and inserted at its begin- ning, thus making a pair of tolerable flyleaves, which are lettered A and B.

The fragment is referred to in Montfaucon's Bibliotheca Coisliniana

(Paris, I715), in his description of Coislin. 299, in the following terms:

Initio autem hujus Codicis habentur duo folia Codicis cujusquam IX. sae- culi, unciali item charactere oblongo et deflexo, ex quadam Homilia vel Sermone (p. 416).

In his Fac-Similes de plus anciens Manuscrits Grecs .. . . du IVe au

XIIC si&cle (1892), H. Omont mentions this leaf (pp. 4 and io), referring it to a homily, and connecting it with a similar uncial fragment, now forming part of Coislin. 46, of which he gives a facsimile (planche XX, 3'). Certainly the hand of the two fragments is much the same. Both 299 and 46 come, according to Montfaucon and Omont, from the laura of St. Athanasius on Mt. Athos.

The leaf in question is of fairly thick parchment, and measures 23.5 cm.

by 35.5 cm. It is inscribed in two columns of forty-one lines each, in Greek uncials of a date not later than the tenth century, although perhaps not much earlier, for the letters are of the exaggerated, sloping type, shaded and adorned with pendants in the usual late uncial style. Montfaucon and Omont refer it to the ninth century. The book from which it has strayed must have been a noble codex, both for size and workmanship.

While engaged in other work upon Coislin. 299, in 1903, I copied the four columns preserved on the leaf. For the identification of the text, I am indebted to my friend and pupil, Mr. Martin Sprengling, who has found the passage among the Spuria ascribed to Chrysostom, and appended to his

genuine works in Migne, Patrologia Graeca, 63 (Joannes Chrysostomus I2), coll. 935-37, being part of a discourse entitled: Els r-'v dlytIv IICIrrpKoTrrijv. I must also acknowledge the courtesy of Professor Sebastian Haidacher of

1 But numbered " 2 " in the description on pp. 9, 1o.

443

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.107 on Sat, 17 May 2014 04:53:06 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

444 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY

Salzburg, the well-known authority upon manuscripts of Chrysostom, in directing me to the works of Montfaucon and Omont cited above.

The manuscript exhibits several itacisms, and there are the abbreviations usually met in uncials: 7rva, K, 0s, etc. It begins: ar-TrdXay v TrV repao'I o I XOV avOppaxa 7rvp~s, and ends: 'ov8 y p iv

&arTv, ouSa yvw'/L L rq,

A•XXa 8St. The text is on the whole a good one, presenting some divergences from the printed text, and the fragment is worthy of the attention of future editors of this homily.

EDGAR J. GOODSPEED THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

MOSES AND MONOTHEISM Gentlemen of the Wellhausen school are invited to take notice. Thirty

years ago they were the ones who attempted to understand the religion of Israel in its relation to the other religions of western Asia. But they have failed to keep up with the advance of science. Their theories have in fact undergone the usual but none the less sad process of petrifaction. Those who once welcomed the light are now striving to keep it out by erecting a division wall between Israel and Babylon. They are given fair warning that it is time for them to revise their musty lectures and to rewrite their antiquated textbooks. Otherwise the advance of their science will leave them hopelessly in the rear. This is the demand of a well-known Old Testament scholar;' and a younger specialist whose earlier work has made a favorable impression upon us echoes the demand for a thorough change in present critical methods.2 Before the publication of either of these demands Professor Baentsch claimed to have brought forward cer- tain facts "unprejudiced consideration of which means a complete change in the present view of the course of Israel's religious history."3 In the face of so widespread a demand the Wellhausenian who refuses to look at the new light will write himself down as desperately hardened indeed.

Wellhausen himself would be the last to claim that there can be no

progress. But those who have learned much from him may possibly have clung too closely to his results. The radicals of one generation are the

1 Sellin, Die alttestamentliche Religion im Rahmen der anderen altorientalischen (Leipzig, 1908), pp. 2, 21.

2 Mose: ein Beitrag zur Untersuchung iiber die Urspriinge der israelitischen Re- ligion. Von Paul Volz. Tilbingen: Mohr, 1907, 115 pages, M. 3. Dr. Volz is the author of an instructive essay entitled Die vorexilische Jakveprophetie und der Messias (1897), and of a meritorious monograph on Jewish eschatology, Die jiidische Eschato- logie von Daniel bis Akiba (1903).

3 Baentsch, Altorientalischer und israelitischer Monotheismus (i90o6).

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.107 on Sat, 17 May 2014 04:53:06 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions