excerpt st basil's rule

7/28/2019 Excerpt St Basil's Rule

1/62

T R S B L Eg


2/62


3/62

The Rule o St Basilin Latin and English

A R C E

Translated byA M. S

A Michael Glazier Book

LITURGICAL PRESSCollegeville, Minnesota

www.litpress.org


4/62

A M Gz B y Lg P

C g y J H. C g: W.

The Latin text o the Regula Basilii is keyed rom Basili RegulaA Rufno LatineVersa, ed. Klaus Zelzer, Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, vol. 86(Vienna: Hoelder-Pichler-Tempsky, 1986). Used by permission o the AustrianAy S.

S y y R .

2013 y O S B, Cg, M. A g .

No part o this book may be reproduced in any orm, by print, microlm, micro-, g, yg, , y y ,known or yet unknown, or any purpose except brie quotations in reviews,without the previous written permission o Liturgical Press, Saint Johns Abbey,PO Box 7500, Collegeville, Minnesota 56321-7500. Printed in the United States A.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Library o Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

B, S, B C, y 329379.T R S B L Eg : /

A M. S.g

A M Gz .I g .ISBN 978-0-8146-8212-8 ISBN 978-0-8146-8237-1 (-)

1. B, S, B C, y 329379. Rg.2. O E g R. I. S,

A, . II. T. III. T: R B.BX386.2.L3 2013255'.8123

2012050879


5/62

In memory o Sven Lundstrm (19142007),

eminent Swedish Latinist and scholar


6/62


7/62

Contents

Ag

I 1

Regula Basilii 44

T R B 45

appendix 1:C T R 291

appendix 2:T E P Questions o the Brothers 299

appendix 3:I S C A Regula Basilii 303

Bgy 309


8/62


9/62

Acknowledgments

It is a glad duty o gratitude to acknowledge here those whose helphas been instrumental in the urtherance o this book: rst o all myuniversity, the University o New England, and the Australian Research

C g j -come; the sterreichische Akademie der Wissenshaten, holder o thecopyright o Zelzers critical edition o the Regula Basili, or their graciouspermission to make use o the Latin text; Klaus Zelzer himsel or his g ; y S L,

their good will and or their permission to reproduce the stemma dia-gram rom Lundstrms book; Greg Horsley, Peter Flood, Heiko Daniel,and other academic colleagues whose personal support has been invalu-

able; Hans Christoersen and the sta o Liturgical Press or their prompt

. My y .

A M ST Uy N Eg

NSW AA Wy, 13 Fy 2013


10/62

The site o Basils ascetic retreat (AD 358362) and earlier o Naucratius andChrysaphius retreat (c. 351356) as reconnoitred, identied, and photographed

by the author on 17 March 2006. The view is to the south southwest. It is situated

gg y, j R Ly I, g B S. H g , sides except or narrow access by oot at the top o the ridge above. The riverIris (very turbulent in the early spring) surrounds it almost on three sides. Annisa

(Uluky), the amily villa where Emmelia and Macrina lived, is about eightkilometers distant, on the other side o the ridge, in the direction o the top right

hand. See the report, Anna M. Silvas, In Quest o Basils Retreat: An Expedition

A P,Antichthon 41 (2007): 7395.


11/62

1

Introduction

The idea o the present volume came partly rom RB 1980.1 In that Latin text already established by Jean Neuville or the Sources Chrtiennesseries, volumes 181186 (197172), endeavouring to distil and convey z .

T j j Rule oBenedict (RB), y, R Hy F B to zealous monks in RB 73.4. The Regula Basilii (RBas)is St Basil the

Greats Small Asketikon as translated into Latin by Runus o Aquileia inAD 397.The choice o a Latin text or the RBas, however, was a little more

problematic than that aced by the editors oRB 1980. The rst and onlytruly critical edition is Basili RegulaA Rufno Latine Versa.2 Two newtranches o critical awareness, however, suggest an updating o Zelzers

text. First is the study o the transmission o the Regula Basiliiby SvenLundstrm, tentatively at rst in his review o Zelzers edition published

Gnomon 60 (M 1988), 58790, y y g, Die berlieerung der lateinischen Basiliusregel.3

Second, there is the study o the Syriac translation o the Small Asketikon,the title o which is aj\ad alaw\c, Quaestiones Fratrum (QF) = Questionso the Brothers. I , QF y g .

1RB 1980: The Rule o Saint Benedict in Latin and English with Notes, ed. Timothy Fry, .(Cg, MN: Lg P, 1981).

2Basili RegulaA Runo Latine Versa, . K Zz, CSEL 86 (V: H-P-Ty, 1986).

3Die berlieerung der lateinischen Basiliusregel, Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, StudiaLatina Upsaliensia 21(U: A U, 1989).


12/62

2 The Rule o St Basil in Latin and English

The present volume will thereore present an updated version oZz L , g L generally conrmed by the Syriac text, together with an annotated English

. I L , g yreerring back to the work accomplished by Zelzer. Philological specialists y Zz. T L gy j g Zz L , L .

T y Regula Basilii g, y G g, g y . T g one hand and the interests o an intelligent non-specialist readership on

. Uy Sy gg y , .

B g , g Small Asketikon . I g , B C, on the amilial, ecclesiastical, theological, and historical ground that C .

Basil o Caesarea

Basil o Caesarea (AD 329378), called the Great by later generations,

was very possibly the rst non-martyr accorded the cult o a saint in the

Christian tradition.4 He was the second child and eldest son o a tena-y C y P E A,south o the Black Sea. His mother, Emmelia, came rom a amily in

C . H , B S, advocate in the city o Neocaesarea, metropolis o Pontus Polemoniacus.Sts Emmelia and Basil the elder are recognized with a east day in theG . A y C ylie and the possibilities o married holiness, the retrieval o this husband

and wie team rom the early church or wider recognition in the church

C .

4 T jg g S Ggy Ny brother, In Basilium Fratrem, in Gregorii Nysseni Opera 10.1, 10934, written in 381.Gregorys aim was to promote January 1 as his brothers memorial day. He proposed g y gg Basils lie and virtues were in every way the equal o those o the prophets andy.


13/62

Introduction 3

As eminent as the younger Basil became, he was but one o severalremarkable siblings. The rstborn was St Macrina the Younger, the spear-

y z j

g g , y Ggy.T - y N, world. The third son was no less than St Gregory o Nyssa, who became

a great speculative theologian and church ather in his own right. Another

g, T, gy y Ggy Nzz brothers companion and a leader among Christian women. Finally, the

-, S P II S, g S A M.

The Christian antecedents o the amily too are notable. Basils paternal

grandmother was St Macrina the Elder. She and her husband had suered

conscation and outlaw status or seven years during the last savagepersecution o Christians in the Roman east by Maximin Daia in the early

y. T M g the church o Neocaesarea, which had been ounded by St GregoryThaumaurgus (ca. 213ca. 270), disciple and panegyrist o the seminalC A, Og (. 185253). A ,

Og y C -. O y, B g-g C y D -century.5 The memory o martyrs and conessors o the aith ran deep in

y.During the 330s and 340s, while resident in Neocaesarea, Basils amily

came to know and beriend a controversial gure, Eustathius o Sebasteia

(. 300379), g g

infuence elt across northern Anatolia rom Constantinople to Armenia.The exaggerations and disorders o this movement were the object ocensures in a spate o church councils. Eustathius himsel seems to have

, y g 350 360.

Hg g g ( ca. 345) as teacher, Basil went on to pursue the best classical Greek

5 Most o these details can be ound in Gregory Nazianzens Oration43, his eulogyon Basil, which in its expanded and published orm became a lengthy biography. SeeL P. MCy, ., ., O S. B G, 2799 Funeral Orations bySaint Gregory Nazianzen and Saint Ambrose, Fathers o the Church 22 (Washington,DC: CUA Press, 1953, repr. with corrections 1968). Basils amily history is in chapters58, . 3035.


14/62


, C C, C-stantinople (349), ollowed by some ve years in Athens under suchmasters as Himerios and Prohairesios.6 There his dearest companion was

Ggy Nzz C, g -ing renown as a Christian orator, being acclaimed as the Theologian G y y .

In 356 Basil suddenly returned rom Athens, very possibly in response

to a amily tragedy. His brother Naucratius had been living an asceticlie or some ve years in a hidden retreat he had discovered by the river

I gg y, 8 yvilla at Annisa. But early in the spring o that year Naucratius, whileshing in the river, died in a sudden onrush o waters. Basil spent a term

g C C, Annisa in Pontus, his elder sister Macrina brusquely challenged himconcerning his earlier intention o pursuing the ascetic lie, a lie o maxi-

C , g y.M Ggy Ny Lie o Macrina, y y M B:

He was at that time excessively pued up with the thought o his

own eloquence and was disdainul o local dignities, since in his g . S,, the goal o philosophy that he withdrew rom the worldly show and

despised the applause to be gained through eloquence, and wentover o his own accord to the lie where one toils even with onesown hands, providing or himsel through perect renunciation a .7

Thus, thanks to his sisters intervention, Basil did not continue topursue the same way o lie as his ather, that o the Christian proes-

6 F y B Gpaideia, see Philip Rousseau, Basil o Caesarea (Berkeley: University o Caliornia Press,1994), 2760. B y H C y Pros tous Neous, -ews. It became a great avourite in the Renaissance, being taken as a classic statemento Christian humanism. For text and translation see Roy J. Deerrari, trans., SaintBasilThe Letters, 4 vols., LCL (Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press, 1926,1928, 1930, 1934), 365435. F y A M, T O S BAddress to Young Men,Antichthon 6 (1972): 7486.

7 Anna M. Silvas, trans.,Macrina the Younger, Philosopher o God (Turnhout: Brepols,2007), 117. S P M, . ., Grgoire de Nysse: La Vie de SainteMacrine, SC 178 (P: C, 1971), g . 162.


15/62

Introduction 5

. I y 358 y, .., , , -y N y .

I 360 370 B g g g A Sy. I -versal church his greatest work was to give coherence and leadership to

N-N . T C been tormented or much o the ourth century by the Arian controversy.

In a nutshell, Arianism was the attempt to recalibrate thename o theFather and the Son and the Holy Spirit M 28:19 Neo-Platonist emanationism. In this view only the Father was truly God,

while the Logos, or the Son emanating rom the Father, was a createdentity, however loty, while the Spirit too was created, but on the nextrung down rom the Logos. In essence, the bar between the uncreated F , Lg S . A Cidentity: was Christian aith and doctrine commensurable with the latest

g, g gy g ?

Bgg 360, g M Antioch and Eusebius o Samosata, Basil orged a theological alliancebased on a clarication o the terms oujsiva (substance, essence, relatedto nature) and uJpovstasi~ (individual subsistence, related to person).E . Thad led not a ew church leaders to be suspicious o the denition o the

N C 325 S oJmoouvsio~(, the same essence) with the Father, i this could be taken to mean identity

o subsistence orperson with the Father. Once the distinction between three hypostases y g legitimacy and the authority o the Nicene denition. Despite the intimi-

dations o the Arian Emperor Valens, the Neo-Nicene initiative gathered

momentum under Basils captaincy throughout the 370s till it eventually

y N E, T I,in the Council o Constantinople in 381.8 This council rearmed the

8 It commenced with Basils riend, Gregory o Nazianzus, who was then the bishop-g C. H yg N-Northodox in the imperial city. For a general survey o the Arian controversy culminat-ing at this council, see Henry Chadwick, The Early Church, rev. ed. (London: Penguin,1993), 13351, and Jean Danilou and Henri Marrou, The Christian Centuries: The FirstSix Hundred Years (London: Darton Longman and Todd, 1964), 25568. For a more


16/62


central Christian intuition, that the divine absolute is both inalienablyone, and also mysteriously and inalienably three, and hence personal, , q

understanding o the constitution o the universe and o the humanbeing. The rearmation o orthodox Christian belie insisted that thebar between the uncreated and the created lay between the Father, theSon, and the Holy Spirit on the one hand, and all else, rom angels to rocks, .

Sy B g and church politics was his role as a leader o ascetic reorm and a ather

. I, g g , y B y and man o prayer. There was something awesome in his single-minded

seeking o God. At the beginning o his commitment to the ascetic lie 350 y the contemporary church.9 He conceived a solution: the promotion osmall communities in which could be realized a ull and uncompromised

dedication to the Christian vocation, the lie o obedience to all the com-mandments. The experience o the years was to teach him that true y y praxis,praxisy

true doctrine, that one without the other tilted toward a ailure o theC , .10

Showing an outstanding capacity or leadership, Basil addressed him-

sel to the rather unruly and idiosyncratic ascetic movement o northern

A, E Sebasteia. It is my contention, argued in several places, that Macrina and

y A 350 y 360was a determinative infuence in the early maturing o Basils conception

C y. B M ather. Rather, in more than one sense she was his spiritual mother, asindeed she was the spiritual mother o her own mother. All the other

detailed study o the later phase and the pivotal role o the Cappadocian Fathers, seeThomas A. Kopecek,A History o Neo-Arianism (Cambridge, MA: Harvard UniversityP, 1979).

9 H y y , about the cause o it, and what to do about it in De Iudicio Dei,PG 31.653676. See thetranslation by W. K. Lowther Clarke, The Ascetic Works o St Basil (London: SPCK,

1925), 7789.10 T y S/P q

y gg yg - q .


17/62

Introduction 7

siblings looked up to Basil as their ather, but not his elder sister. While

B y C . 362363 P, yg the siblings, reached a vowable age o about 17 years. In taking this

step Peter resolved not to depart to the secluded retreat in the mountaingorge country, but to stay at the Annisa villa. In this way the amilyhousehold reached its nal transormation into a dedicated ascetic com-

munity, comprising a house o virgins, a house or dedicated men ormonks, a house or children, and a house or guests, with a commonhouse o prayer. When Basil returned north in 363, this nal monastic

A .Thus between the years 358 and 363 Basils ascetic thinking underwent

a considerable shit rom the earlier reelance lie o male ascetics to acomprehensively communitarian conception o the Christian ascetic lie.

Dg P, 363365, g -ordered cenobitic (rom koivno~ bivo~, common lie) monasticism, inserted

into, exemplary or, and at the service o the wider church.11 This concep-

tion o Christian community went hand in glove with the theology o Hy Ty. T y humanity, made in Gods image as a social being. This call to communion

z g -munity, and in a very concrete ashion in the Christian ascetic community.

Thus Basils ascetic and moral teaching was based on a well-thought-through anthropology and pedagogy, an understanding o what human

beings were created to be and how they might be best helped to achieve

their ultimate calling. One o the strongest arguments in Christian litera-

ture against the solitary lie is ound in the Small Asketikon 3.35. Meditat-ing the scene portrayed in John 13:5, Basil targets the ascetic individualist

with the immortal words: Whose eet will you wash? For whom willy ?B y

preaching tours through the 360s and 370s. The corpus o his asceticg, Asketikon, .12 T

11 See my book, The Asketikon o St Basil the Great (Oxord: Oxord University Press,2005). Chapter 4, The Emergence o Monasticism in Fourth-Century Anatolia,51101, traces in detail the development o Basils thinking and practice o the Chris-

.12 T B gy

g y G, L, Sy, A,A, Gg, S, . I g y P J.


18/62


originated during conerences in which the ascetics would ask Basil how

y g G g y . T q B y yg-

raphers and eventually worked up as a single book. Basil himsel de-scribes the procedure in his Letter 223, addressed to Eustathius in about375, y g . H E:

A y: y by the river Iris (posavki~ eJmav~ ejpeskevyw ejpi; th~ monh~ th~ ejpi tw`/ [Iridi

potamw`/), when, moreover, our most divinely beloved brother Gregory

, g y?

. . . And how many days did we spend in the village on the oppositeside, at my mothers (povsa~ de hJmevra~ ejpi; th~ ajntivperan kwvmh~, para;

th`/ mhtriv mou), where we lived as riends among riends, with con- g y g? . . . A your tachygraphers not present with me as I dictated matters against

y? W y y -ence the whole time? While visiting the brotherhoods (ajdelovthta~)

and spending whole nights with them in the prayers, always speak-

ing and hearing things concerning God without contention, did I

y ? 13

T , Small Asketikon, - C y B gg . 357/358 , C 365, B E. Iseems very likely that he nished editing the work in about 366 and sent

P gy .

Basil continued to make pastoral visits to ascetic communities during 360 g y B C (370378).F q into the text. Thus theAsketikon was a work in progress as long as Basillived and was able to devote strength to visiting and encouraging the . By S 378 Asketikon, Great Asketikon, z g y

Fedwick. See especially his Bibliotheca Basiliana Universalis 3: Ascetica, CCSG (Turnhout:B, 1997). Ay Asketikon . 1698.

13 B,L 223, Correspondance, . 3, . . Y C, 2. (P: L B L, 2003), 14; Eg D, Letters 3, 3025.


19/62

Introduction 9

in two or three versions. A major reordering o the Great Asketikon alongthematic linesthe Pontic Recensionmay have been carried out asy B A 376. I y P,

B yg , y g P R y.

Rufnus o Aquileia

Basils infuence as a monastic ather also let its mark in the lie o the

Western church. His great mediator to the west was Runus o Aquileia

(. 354411).14 F 370 397 R Lmonastery on the Mount o Olives in Jerusalem. It had been ounded by

Antonia Melania (St Melania the Elder). The structure o Melanias mon-

astery seems to have been very like the conception o the adelphotes inBasilsAsketikon: separate houses or women, or men, or guests, etc.,all using a common church and all conceived as part o the one Christian

ascetic community. In about the year 378 Runus journeyed north toSyria on a bookhunting expedition. He visited Antioch and even reached

as ar as Edessa, the heartland o Syriac-speaking Christianity. Since Basil

Sy, y S, R ymissed him in these regions by a ew years.15 It is very tempting to think

that during this journey Runus may have acquired his copy o the GreekSmall Asketikon M g-nance o their community.16However, it must be said that the Greek text y Sy , - , q

14 O gy R F X. My, Runus o Aquileia(345411): His Lie and Works, (Washington, DC: CUA Press, 1945), and Giorio Fedalto,R C. E g,Antichit Altoadriatiche 39 (1992):1944. Useul summary studies are E. C. Brooks, The Translation Techniques oRunus o Aquileia (343411), Studia Patristica 18 (1982): 35764, and Monica Wagner,Runus the Translator, (Wg, DC: CUA P, 1945), y 3, A- P, 2964.

15 According to Benot Gain, Basil visited Samosata more than once: Lglise deCappadoce au IVe Sicle daprs la correspondance de Basile de Csare 330379, OCA 225(R: P O I, 1985); A 2: Vyg B, 39396.In his letter 145 to Eusebius, written in 373, Basil speaks o his returning rom Syria.

16 F y R y y E C: Pg BAsketikon W, Vigiliae Christianae 56 (2002): 24759. I article I argued or a Syrian source o Runuss copy. Now I would be more cautious .


20/62


as used by Runus. Alternatively, Melania and Runus may have acquired

their copy during its postal progress down to the monks in Egypt.17 Basil

himsel had contact with monks on the Mount o Olives in the 370s, and

this relationship may have gone back to the late 360s.18

So here too isanother possible point o access to the Small Asketikon in Palestine, and themost direct, rom Basil himsel. Alas, the Origenist controversy, sparked

y E S y T A Jerome o Bethlehem, caused erce controversy in the church in Palestine

390. T J R, 397 .

W R , y P N, on his way up the Via Appia to Rome, he was very pleased to accepthospitality in a monastery at Pinetum, which appears to have beensomewhere near Terracina on the Tyrrhenian coast. As Runus relatesin his own preatory letter, the superior there, Ursacius, ater hearingRunus wax lyrical about Basil as a monastic ather, begged him to G . By -g q R L o the Greek athers that lled the remainder o his days. In his preatory

letter Runus reers to the document as the Institutiones Basilii (the

I B), g Regula Basilii R B.

Runus expressed the hope that Basils rule might become the standard

W. I q y. I, L R g g

17 A ragment o the Greek Small Asketikon rom Egypt, preserved in the AshmoleanM O, gz y S J. V, P. A. 111, g-norato delle Eratopokriseis brevius tractatae di Basilio, Basil o Caesarea: Christian,

Humanist, Ascetic, . P J F (T: PIMS, 1981), 56570. Sg-cantly, this ragment includes the equivalent o RBas 117 and 118, which do not appearin the QF, clearly implying a Greek text closer to that which lay beore Runus.Fedwick, BBV3, 3, also lists two other ragmentary traces o the Greek Small Asketikon,one originally rom the Great Lavra, Mount Athos; the other rom St CatherinesMy, S.

18 B y M O 370.The earliest letters rom around 370/371 suggest the amiliarity is already well-established, i.e., going back into the 360s. See Letter 258 to Epiphanius (a masterpiece y), D, Letters 4, 3839, L 259, ., 4649. S

. 2067. B M Owere Palladius and Innocent. This Palladius may have been the one who wrote toAthanasius (PG 26, 1167) bidding him counsel the monks in Caesarea to cease op-posing Basilapparently over Basils economy in discussing the divinity o theHy S.


21/62

Introduction 11

in southern Italy in the th and sixth centuries. Thus it was available in

g -y Rule oBenedict made use o it as one o his major sources. So it was not the Rule

o Basil, Rule o Benedict Cg W . A y RBzealous monks, eager or something more, are sent to the rule o ourHy F B.19 T RB -guage and thought-world o Egyptian monasticism, particularly through

the infuence o the so-called Rule o the Master and o St John Cassians

Institutes Conerences. T . I .

T B, , g Ag others, acted on the author o the RB to qualiy this anchoretically in-spired heritage with a doctrine o the primacy o communion and omutual love as the way o lie o Christians, and o the necessity o a- g , . S B-tine tags o the RB prove on closer inspection to derive rom Basil.20W RB 1.12, g y ,

monks who live in a well-ordered community under a superioras g ( ?) o monks, it very much conveys the mind o Basil, who spends hisg , RB 2, gg j .

The Regula Basilii as a document

Modern critical investigation o the text o the Regula Basiliibegins

with Jean Gribomonts major work, Histoire du Texte des Asctiques deSaint Basile.21 Up to that time it was generally assumed that the Latin Asketikon R y- g G .22Agg

19 RB 73.5. A , L Eg , RB 1980 ( ).

20 E.g., the Benedictine stress on the reverent handling o all material things, based RB 31.10:He will regard all utensils and the goods o the monastery as sacred vessels o

the altar.T y Small Asketikon / Regula Basili 103.21 Jean Gribomont,Histoire du Texte des Asctiques de Saint Basile (Louvain: Muson,1953).

22 An example o the older view: What he, Runus, actually did was to combine the q ( 55 regulae usius 313 brevius tractatae)


22/62


Ferdinand Laun,23 Gribomont conrmed and demonstrated extensively

Asketikon : called the Small Asketikon, and a later revised and much augmented ver-

sion, the Great Asketikon. The integral Greek text o the Small Asketikonhas not survived,24 though o course much o it remains embedded inB .

Gribomont highlighted the inormation supplied by the Scholiast.25This erudite editor o Basils Great Asketikon in the late th or early sixthcentury told o a shorter earlier version o BasilsAsketikon and how asubsequent longer version came to be produced. Finally, Gribomont Small Asketikon y Sy , essentially the same shorter text as Runuss translation. Gribomont: I Q, R Sytranslator knew one and the same shorter text, the existence o whichwas attested in the sixth century by the Vulgate Scholiast. The priorexistence o this recension, armed by the Scholiast, deserves to be.26

Sy B ascetica g - y -

vestigators in this eld. This is Paul J. Fedwicks multi-volume BibliothecaBasiliana Vniversalis, y, , 3:Ascetica. Ayo the textual transmission o BasilsAsketikon in its several versions and, g , y g, 1585. T Small Asketikon (F A 1) y . 186; g R L (A 1) . 443, Sy (A 1) . 4346.

that made up the Rules o Basil into 203 questions and answers, rearranging the order,combining several o the originally separate sections, and rather reely translating . My, Runus o Aquileia, 91.

23 Ferdinand Laun,Die beiden Regeln des Basilius, ihre Echtheit und Entstehung,Zeitschrit r Kirchengeschichte 44 (1925): 161, acknowledged by Gribomont,Histoiredu Texte, 1, 2, 193 . 1, 207, 237 . 2, 25253.

24 E g, F, BBV3:Ascetica, 24.25 O S G,Histoire, 15157, A M. S, The Aske-

tikon o St Basil the Great (Oxord: Oxord University Press, 2005), 48. He was theEndredaktor o what Gribomont calls the Vulgate recension o the Great Asketikon, laterg A 3 y F ( ), I P R.

26 G,Histoire, 238 ( ).


23/62

Introduction 13

Towards a critical text o the Regula Basilii

We now narrow our ocus to Asketikon 1r, the Regula Basilii. But rst y g L . I g zz j

g B L, B, g . Zzrenders it as Basili. But then, the genitive o Gregorius is posted asGregorii in the title Gregorii Nysseni Opera. Finally, I questioned Proes- B G , gy g :

1. Ag gy, g ; nouns (i.e., substantives) in ius, it is in i until the era o Augustus.

F j, -what earlier: already in Lucretius, there ispatrii in I.832, and severalother examples. From then on manuscripts present a genitive in ii,

even the oldest manuscript o the Regula Basilii, namely Sessorianus55, rom the second hal o the sixth century (see the apparatus inK. Zz, . 3).

2. Zelzer has adopted the orthography o the classical era, theC . I . P example rom the writings o Ambrose? I do not know, it would S A, Ido not have to hand. Perhaps, even without doubt, not one example

o Basili as the latinised orm o the Greek name o a man (Basileiosin Greek), and hence o our Basil, has been preserved rom the ourth

y.In conclusion, in order to avoid shats rom Zelzer, you could

jy gy Basiliiy yg y gy R, gy.

What I have been able to say is ater verication rom Alred

E,Morphologie historique du latin

, 3

g,P, 1953, . 2829. I F, B L.27

In this book Basilii it shall be then, and hence: Regula Basilii.A briesketch o the course o its appearance in editions28 will show us the long

y .W g y, g

the Benedictine Centuries under such leaders as Bl Peter the Venerable,

27 A F.28 See the survey in Gribomont,Histoire, 32332, and the comprehensive gazette o

F, BBV3, 52185.


24/62


St Bernard o Clairvaux, and St Hildegard o Bingen. Early in the ollow-

g y, N 1215, L, G Cas it was called, was held under Pope Innocent III. In its thirteenth canon

a brave attempt was made to curb the prolieration o new religiousorders or congregations, a phenomenon destined or a long career in the .29 Tg y, - y : R B, R B ( RB)30, R Ag31, R F, y P I -y 1209.32

29 C L IV, C XIII: Ne nimia religionum diversitas gravem

in ecclesia Dei conusionem inducat, frmiter prohibemus, ne quis de cetero novam religioneminveniat: sed quicumque voluerit ad religionem converti, unam de approbatis assumat. Si-militer qui voluerit religiosam domum undare de novo, regulam & institutionem accipiat dereligionibus approbatis. . . . L G D M , ., SacrorumConciliorum nova et amplissima collectio, vol. 22, cols. 10023 (Paris: Hubert Welter, 1901;repr. 1960): Lest too great a variety lead to conusion in the Church o God, we rmlyorbid that anyone henceorth ound a new religious order: but i anyone wants to g ( y) .L g , g .

30

The estrangement o Eastern and Western Christendom had lately been reinorcedy 1204 C y F C. T Emonks who looked to Basil as their ather (or really, preeminent among their athers) R y G R Sy Iy, S T S. T O S B G gg R B -T.

31 The sanction o this brie Rule refects the status o the premier ather in theWestern church. Its earliest appearance was in the collections o Rules in the pre-Carolingian era. RM and RB quote it. The RA rst came into its own in the post-Carolingian period, being associated not with monasteries but with clerics iny (). I g y yo institutes, including the Premonstratensians and the Knights Templar, in the twelthcentury. Its use escalated ater the Great Council. The most important o the new O P D, -tions came to be a model or the constitutions o other orders, even o the Franciscansand Carmelites, who had their own primitive rules. See Raymond Canning andT J V B, The Rule o Augustine (L: D Lg T,1984), 36.

32 S F R g y I 1209

in the process o articulation until Franciss last years. The Rule o Albert received y H III 1226, A y Latin Patriarch o Jerusalem between 1206 and 1214. See Joachim Smet, Carmelites,New Catholic Encyclopedia, . 3 (Wg, DC: CUA P, 1967), 118. T R


25/62

Introduction 15

T RB g-lation.33 On 13 April 1500 a collection o the Rules o Benedict, Basil,Augustine, and Francis, compiled by Jean Franois Brixianus, a Bene-

Cgg S J P, V y J S. T -, y F BBV3. Trst edition was subsequently republished at Rouen in 1510, Paris in1514 and 1519, and Cologne in 1575. The same text was borrowed un-changed, although with chapters divided dierently, in an edition oSancti Basili Opera, P y J B P 1523, Cg 1523 1531, Z 1588, G 1619 1669.

The Cistercian scholar Franois Bivar (Franciscus Bivarius) was the RB y . H g H, (not identied but very like Brixianuss text) he attributed to Smaragdus.

However, he died prematurely in 1634 so that his text did not appear till

1662, Ly y T Gz.I 1661 V M R Codex Regularum

St Benedict o Aniane in an edition prepared by Lucas Holste. As the basis

H y Cg (Hist. Archiv. W. .231) made in 1643 or Fabio Chigi, papal nuncio in Cologne at the time.34

T Cg T , M.This edition o the Codex Regularum was republished in Paris in 1663 andin Augsburg in 1759. It was also the version used by Migne in 1851,Patrologia Latina . 103, . 423702. T RB . 483554; introductory material, including Runuss preace, is in cols. 48386,

the text beginning in col. 487. Compared with M, Holstes edition showed

aulty readings, regrettable omissions, and a text let unintelligible in. B B A (M) had been collating, emending, and editing on his own account in theeighth century,35 or M itsel was ar rom representative o the RBas text.

Zelzer says that this version o the text (M) was known to Benedict rom

o Clare, drawing in part on those o Francis and Benedict, was approved at the urgent j 1253.

33 S G,Histoire, 1002.34 Chigi was Pope Alexander VII by the time o this printing in Rome and was

g .35 Gribomont,Histoire, 102, adduces the text-critical work o A. Boon, whose study

R P .


26/62


his south-west Gallic home. That helps explain the Holste text, whichultimately goes back to M and which text version deviates strongly rom

the general transmission, as a consequence o the exceptional orm o

-G/S .36

Gribomont37 made a couple o textual soundings: rst, o the opening

o Runuss preace, second, o RBas 8. He used S, L, C, D, two eleventh-

century Monte Cassino manuscripts (#16, 17), the Venice edition o 1500,

Bivar, and Holste. His judgement o Holste was: Holstes, nevertheless,

is the best o the three editions . . . his text contains several literary . . . , to that o the Vulgate . . . but is in general aithul.38 Zelzer in the mean-

time more thoroughly researched the matter and ound he could notsupport Gribomonts relatively avourable assessment o Holstes.39

Zelzers edition o the Regula Basilii

The rst comprehensively critical edition o the Regula Basilii waspublished in 1986, i.e., Klaus Zelzer, Basili RegulaA Rufno Latine Versa.40Zelzer explains in his preace that his work was part o a long-term

project to publish critical editions o the Latin monastic rules. His volume , g R H Ruleo St Benedict and Adalbert de Vog and Ferdinand Villegass edition Rule o Eugippius.

I (. ) Zz a list o sixty-ve codices containing the text o the RBas. They date rom

the sixth to the teenth centuries. He appends a list o ve codicesmentioned in catalogues o manuscripts o the ninth and tenth centuries

but that are now lost. For his edition Zelzer examined twenty o themand chose ourteen, ranging rom the sixth to the eleventh centuries, or

collation. The ollowing is a list o his selection with abbreviated notes,41

g H .

36 Klaus Zelzer, Zur berlieerung der Lateinischen Fassung der Basiliusregel,in idem, berlieerungsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen, ed. Franz Paschke (Berlin:A-Vg, 1981), 634.

37 G,Histoire, 1035.38 A F.39 Zz, Z g, 635 . 1.40 S . 2 .41 Zz y . . S G

,Histoire, 96102, F , BBV3, 1533.


27/62

Introduction 17

Codices and Edition collated by Zelzer

O the ollowing codices, only B and C, and in a qualied sense T,contain only the RBas. All other manuscripts consist o collections omonastic rules and other ascetical writings o interest to monks, o which RB , .

B

Codex Mediolensis Ambrosius C. 26 sup. (Milan, Ambrosian Library),seventh century; in Anglo-Saxon majuscule script (and orthography) very

y B; y .

C

Codex Leninopolitanus F. v. I. 2,42

ormerly Corbeiensis, end o seventh,gg g y; y rom Corbie abbey ca. 700; Merovingian orthography; together with E and

S , .

E

Codex Parisiensis Bibl. Nat. lat. 12634 (Paris), late sixth century; in southern

Italian uncial script. Passed through the abbeys o Corbie and S. Germain-

des-Prs, whence to the National Library. This interesting and very old

codex originally came rom the same locale (Compania) and is almostcontemporary with the composition o the RB, bearing witness to the sameeld o monastic reading as that underlying the RB. De Vog has plausibly

connected the codex with Eugippius o Lucullanum, whose library was R .43 F 9-77contain a collection o excerpts rom the rules o Augustine, the Four Fathers,

the Master, Basil, Pachomius, the works o Novatian, the Conerences and

I C, J L 125. T y Vg F Vg Regula Eugippi.44I -

RB. Tg C S, E , .

F

Fragmenta codicis Aurelianensis 192 (169) (Orlans), . 23, sixth/seventh

century; in southern Gallic script; once o the abbey o St Benot-sur-Loire,

Fy; ; -, .g., 8.25 vagos () vagus.

42 I do not know whether the manuscript has been renamed ollowing the reversiono Leningrad to its ormer name, St Petersburg, or returned to the manuscripts ormer, C.

43 S Zz, Z g, 5.44 It was published as volume 87 in the CSEL series, immediately ollowing the

Regula Basili.


28/62


G

Codex Sangallensis 926 (Sankt Gallen), pp. 2226, ninth century; in Caro-

lingian minuscule; written without doubt at the abbey; its collection o

documents stems ultimately rom Lerins and very close to LW, even deriv-g g y (Zz 1980, 634); g .

H

Codex Londiniensis Musei Britannici Add. 30055 (L), . 142194,tenth century; a collection o monastic rules, beautiully executed inVisigothic script with Visigothic orthography; it once belonged to they S P C, Bg,

Codex Caradignensis, whence Dom Bivar borrowed it or his edition. It I F.

J

Codex Rotomagensis 728 (Rouen), . 150, tenth century. Once o themonastery o Jumiges; the order o chapters (which Zelzer gives) is in y; Mg gy.

L

Codex Lambacensis XXXI (Lambach), . 172, beginning o ninth century; R g Cg y that o the monastery o Mnsterschwarzach; heavily corrected by laterhands; composed o two parts, joined, it is thought, in the twelth century.

T gg y L g g RB.

M

Codex Monacensis Bibl. Nat. Lat. 28118 (M), y. CRegularum S. Benedicti AnianensisSt Benedict o Anianes collection omonastic rules and o a dating contemporary with him. It is a huge collec-

, gg RB; S M T, the year 821 in the same monastery in which Codex Z was written, perhaps

I (K). T y y, source o Holstes printed edition. Zelzer (1980 p. 632) tested M againstconcurrences o the two oldest Italian manuscripts, E and S, and ound g RB, M g.

P

Codex Parisiensis Bibl. Nat. Lat. 12238 (Paris), .172, beginning o ninth

y; S G--P; G .


29/62

Introduction 19

S

Codex Romanus Bibl. Nat Sessorianus 55 (Rome), second hal o sixthcentury. S, along with E, is the oldest surviving witness to the text. In

northern Italian semiuncial script; it was renovated in the eighth/ninthcentury at the monastery o Nonantola (near Modena); olios 68 and 69 -Cg ; 169176 y Py ( 177 RB g). Tg C E, S , .

T

Codex Turonensis 615 (Tours), ninth century. This codex, containing only

RB, y M T gg

g y; Vg gy.

W

Codex Guelerbytanus 4127 (Wolenbttel), . 81118v, eighth/ninthcentury. Title in the rst olio: Codex o the monastery o the holy apostles Peterand Paul in Wissenburg (where it was written); its collection o writingsderives ultimately rom Lerins; represents the most amplied or aug- .

ZCodex Aurelianensis 233 (203) (O), gg y.Concordia Regularum S. Benedicti Anianensi, i.e., St Benedict o Anianes

; y Fy; M; - 821.

Hol.

Benedicti Aniansis Codex Regularum, ed. Lucas Holste, Paris, 1663; rst

R y V M, 1661;

Codex Regularum y Mg 1851, PL 103, . 423-702.The RBas is ound in cols. 483-554, introductory material including RunussPreace, cols. 483-486, the text, col. 487-702. Though Zelzer adduces Holstes

y g ,but simply states that Holste culled his text rom the transmission in codices

o the rules o Benedict o Aniane and in other texts available to him in Rome,

g .

The early dissemination o the Rg B

Zelzers account o the textual transmission45 may be ttingly supplied

. H g .

45 Lgy . .


30/62


T , E S G, L, W , R L - y y Iy

L. GLW, g various German locations, contain not only the RBas but other monastictexts whose authors were very popular during the th and sixth centu-

ries in the monastery o Lerins and were held in high repute in southern

Gaul. From this it is clear that their text o the RBas derived rom a source

in the monastery o Lerins. This text in many places and their own index

o chapters already dier in the earliest centuries rom the text in theItalian and certain other Gallic codices, whose principal codices are CES.

T , CES y y Iy G y L .

The period rom the sixth to the eighth centuries was the era o themixed rules. The RBas was used in many monasteries o Italy and Gaul

as one o a growing library o monastic rules and monastic literature,.g., R B, P, C, M, Benedict, and others. Sometimes this body o monastic writings wassynthesised by local abbots into a rule or their particular time and place.

This is exactly the historical milieu in which the Rule o Benedict wasgy .

The codices HO46T show that another orm o the text was dissemi-nated through the region o Visigothic Spain. Very like it was the textused by Benedict o Aniane in the compilation o his Codex and hisConcordia Regularum, MZ. F g B A y RB Vg , -

ings rom the tradition o Lerins; whether he himsel confated theVisigothic and southern Franco-Gallic traditions or ound some such g .

T Regula Basilii -turies do not oer a very consistent text, but show several dierentstrands o transmission. Since both the Italian and Gallic codices, owhich CES are the most ancient, dier among themselves in several , - Lerins (GLW) Spanish Visigothic (HOT, MZ) -sions not only cohere among themselves in adding certain corruptg y -

46 N Zz .


31/62

Introduction 21

y , y earliest centuries the Latin text o the RBas was corrupted, altered, inter-

, (y y ) y.

Zz z -semination o the RBas beyond Italy, Gaul, Germany, and Spain. I amindebted to Fr. Mark Savage o Pluscarden Abbey or bringing to my S C (521597) RBas. The early Gaelic poemAmra Choluimb Chille (The Elegy o ColumCille) extols this great church ather o Ireland and Scotland, the Apostle

o the Picts. Written shortly ater Columbas death by the Irish poetnicknamed Dalln Forgaill, it declares Ar-bert Bassil brthu / ar-gairg (H jg B /who orbids acts o boasting by great hosts).47 Columba also seems to C.48

1. Errors in the earliest copies

*1. There are some places in all or most codices which demonstrate even the oldest copies, or the text either o the translator himselor o those who transmitted it in the frst decades, are not without

several aults, errors, omissions, and corruptions, e.g., Pre. 2 saeculodedit ( g ?); 4:11 qui; 7:14 nec; 8:13 dum/cum (omitted through correction PW); 9:12 elementi (corrected by Benedicto Aniane); 36:449eius (or Iesu); 46:3 non (through translators error?);49:3 si in opere . . . contendamus; 99:2 dat/det; 122:7 et quidem (or equidem);171:3 et quia ( ex qua); 172:4pro (g gy); 178:3replere illius ( replebimus); 184:7 audit autem ( audita autem ggy).

2. Where C(E)S are preferable

*2. H, the most ancient co-dices C(E)S more oten preserve the authentic text, :

*2.1 G Great Asketikon, G Little Asketikon y , .g., 2:82 speculam quandam CS; 3:38 et . CES, P, GLW; 5:9 est

47 In Thomas Owen Clancy and Cilbert Mrkus, eds. and trans., Iona: the EarliestPoetry o a Celtic Monastery (Eg: Eg Uy P, 1995), 107.

48 S Cy M, Iona, 109.49 A Zz 36:3.


32/62


vobis CS; 6:2 sancta doctrinae S; 13:1 Iothor C.S; 29:1 hoc contrarium est illitestimonio CES, JP; 34:2aciebat CS; 55:2 voluntates CS; 78:1 zelus tuus CS, P;80:1 ille me misit S; 99:2 suscipiet ES; 101:2 ingressibus CS; 120:3 oboeditis S;122:7 cum uratus est linguam auream ES, J, ira Domini CES, J; 122:8 equidemES; 123:6 libertatem CS, J; 132 Quest. illa S, J; 139:3 ait CS, PT; 155:1praecipuasunt CS; 162:1 audientiam CS, P.50

*2.2 L make it more easily intelligible, or lacks those words added to passages S S y ( that the Lerins tradition is more contaminated with certain additionsthan are the other traditions),51 .g., P.5 maniestare GLW, M, H.; ser-monis GLW, M, H.; P.11 spatium GLW, H.; 2:7 a Deo GLW, H.; 14:3

nostri Iesu Christi (or Dei Sui) GLW; 42:4 vias eius discas et GLW, PMZ, Hol.;43:1 debet GLW, JMZ, H.; 52:3 et non egerunt paenitentiam GLW, H.; 55:3et requiem temporibus meis GLW, H.; 112:5 vel voluntate . . . Dei modereturGLW, MZ, H.; 164:3 vel a maioribus GLW, HJMPT, H.; 172:3 similiter etperam GLW, M, H.; 173:152possitis GLW, HM, H.; 173:3 et non ipsis prae-sumus sed GLW, HM, H.

*2.3 G S R , .g., 8:2 in sanctitate CS; 74:1 audientes CS, JP, GL.

*2.4 Such examples demonstrate that even those places or the adjudication

o which neither the Greek text nor any other criterion avail may be de- y y C(E)S. T g -portance are those places in which the oldest codices, ES, not corresponding

completely between themselves, agree with Corbeiensis, i.e., C, e.g., 3:3usibus; 3:5, 6 (q ) ne . . . quidem.

3. Where C(E)S do not offer the best text

*3. However, rom certain places it is clear that these codices C(E)S , , g :

*3.1 y : 3:19 proditur ES ;

*3.2 e/i, o/u b/v , .g., 12:1 loquituror loquetur, c. 125:2; 3:8 visitavit or visitabit; 44 Quest. observavimus orobservabimus; 69:1 quid debet ad qui devitat; 86 Q. qui in opere quinuper;

50 These are cases where more weight attaches to the witness o a minority o codices(CES) and Great Asketikon jy .

51 T lectio dicilior.52 I Zz 173: Q.


33/62

Introduction 23

*3.3 g g -cord with the Greek: when versions are ound, in codices C(E)S and others,

o passages o Sacred Scripture disagreeing with the authentic text oScripture they may be taken, as we said above, or the genuine versionso Runus. These versions o Scripture, having arisen rom errors eithero the text itsel or o the translator, were aterwards corrected in a number

g S. H, do suspect that certain places o the Rule itsel which disagree with the G g C(E)S g g Runus (e.g., 22:2germinabunt CS, P) since it is maniestly unlikely that L RB C(E)S g G .

4. Where GLW are preferable

*4. T in a ew places codices GLW, with other codicesexcepting CESpreserved the authentic text from

the Greek, .g., 2:67 ergo per primum completur et secundum; 79:1 si; 88:2ab apostolo; but in many places they oer a poorer text, aected o courseby the Lerins transmission, whether through alterations or additions, or

exhibiting in passages o Scripture needing translation a Vulgate version, , R .

Moreover, we may regret that codex Floriacensis (F Fragmenta codicis

Aurelianensis 6/7c.) One suspects that though it does not lack aults and

corruptions it might have added something to contribute to the deter-mining o the text, but unortunately it has come down to us in littleg.

5. The importance of the Greek text

*5. T y G Great Asketikon importance when it alone indicates to us what the Latin version, cor- y y, -vey; e.g., 49:3, where the Latin text is maniestly corrupt; 69:4, whereRunus has deectively put vel . . . vel or h| . . . h[; 79:2., where theLatin text is scarcely intelligible; 99:2, where it is apparent that the mean-

ing o the question/heading appears to have been contaminated with misericordiae; 178:3, replere illiusy replebimus.

All the same, the Greek text is not everywhere o the same importance,

since the text o the Great Asketikon is not the same as that o the Small


34/62


Asketikon as translated by Runus, now lost, nor did Runus himsely G .

6. Problems with versions of Scripture

*6. T g y B to decide than the rest o his Latin translation, since not only was theGreek text o Scripture itsel already marked by diverse readings, butalso the Latin text o Scripture was transmitted in several versions, O L Vg. N y , copyists wrote down not only readings o the Vulgate instead o the Old

Latin readings but even readings retained in their memory instead othose ound in any copy, e.g., 8:9 instabunt HJMTZ, Hol.; 16:1 corripeGLW, P; 16:3 ecclesiam non B, GLW, P; 18:2 sed timorem HJMT, H.; 26:4erue GLW, P, H.; 26:5 membrorum tuorum GLW, HJM(T)Z, H.; 82:8 adimitandum B, GLW, HMTZ, Hol.; 114:3 talenta GLW, M, Hol.; 118:2 reliqui-mus GLW; 156:7 dilectione GLW, HMT, H.

Lundstrms review o Zelzers edition

I 1978 S L, L University o Lund, published a lengthy book review o Zelzers edition.

He suitably commends Zelzers achievement, because by means o it we

are acquainted with the readings o the important manuscripts. Hepraises the critical apparatus, which he says is seldom or never incorrect,

y I V. H g Zz .

The major ault he would nd with Zelzers approach, however, is

that he insuciently investigated the stemma, i.e., the systematic pattern . T ,he says, one must look or passages where obviously impossible readings

, errors relating to the linking and division o words. So he briefy sketches

, g g -y:

classa g S C.

classb consisting o sub-classes g (i.e., P and W, LG) and d (i.e., B TH, MZ J).

Copyists and prooreaders, o course, carried out their own corrections

and conjectures, and sometimes consulted some other manuscript apart


35/62

Introduction 25

y . T discerning the crossed lines o infuence, or contamination, to use Lund-

.

I -z g o what he means. Most cases show that Zelzers judgment has beeny .53 Ty y g q y y . E L g L .

Lundstrms monograph

The ull extent o Lundstrms amiliarity with the interrelationshipo the manuscripts was revealed in a monograph he published in theollowing year: Die berlieerung der lateinischen Basiliusregel.54 Lundstrm y y y jg, , .

A ,L :

1. T F: gg -.

2. Contamination: when copyists and prooreaders consulted othermanuscripts or versions o Scripture in addition to their primaryexemplar, thereby mingling the lines o descent, and also when they

conjectured and editorialized, sometimes very thoughtully, over g.

3. The Archetype: highlighting the act that there were errors and

g .

Lundstrms diagram o the stemma on p. 9, showing the lines o lia-

, .I zg Die berlieerung, y

mentioned in each case that represent departures rom Zelzers editorial

.

53 The opening o 79.1 is greatly varied in the MSS, and Zelzer decided to reconstructit as si possibile est, in keeping with the available Greek, eij dunatovn ejsti. This seems . L, (L1 589), R gy sane, G .

54 S . 3 .


36/62


37/62

Introduction 27

I. B. Errors in b (= P, WLG, B, TH, J, MZ) (. 1318)

Here Lundstrm examines some ten cases in which Zelzer rightlyj g b. T y which Zelzer incorrectly ollowed b instead oa. They are: 108.1, 5.3,198.2, 156.5. It is dicult to see what Lundstrms issue with Zelzers 5.3 , -. I y quam a was preerable to the quantum ob, but Lundstrm maintains thatquantum R , j Zz . T

STEMMA CODICUM


38/62


198.2 where, according to Lundstrm, Runus wrote quam feri potestrationabiliter instead o the quantum feri potest rationabiliter o Zelzers. B , g q.

I. C. Errors (Variants) in g (= P and WLG) (. 1819)

Here Zelzer has rightly treated many readings peculiar to P and WLG

as errors or aulty variants. Lundstrm advocates no departures romZz gy.

I. D. Errors (Variants) in d (= B and THJ, MZ) (. 1921)

Zz y . L .

II. Contamination

A L ,55 y y contamination pick up both correct and incorrect readings. His intention

y, , , y

time to time and retain a alse reading in place o a correct reading. In g , y g y g . Tcorrect readings are not really reliable indicators, since a prooreader can

y g j through the use o another manuscript and thereby obscure the character

q. T are dependent on certain other manuscripts through contamination.Here indeed the errors are important, because by and large a prooreader

scarcely replaces correct readings o his source document with obviously g .

II. A. From C to P (. 2230)

L g 2.Q, y --y a b y ait ais. P C y- j asseris.C 63.3, 68.Q, 130.4,110.1, 122.7 (e[t]quidem), 122.8, 123.Q, 164.Q, 173.34, 108.1 ( ),

190.Q, 195.9.

55 L2 22.


39/62

Introduction 29

II. B. From C to J (. 3032)

I gy L Zz y 45.3.

II. C. From C to WLG (. 3243)

H L Zz 3.31, 2.25, 79.1, 121.2.

II. D. From W to MZ (. 4348)

L Zz (. 44) g MZthat had been imported into Holste. The only correction is at 139.2

(incident/incedunt).

II. E. From S to J (. 4854)

Lundstrm corrects Zelzers text at 3.18, 113.1, 130.2, 130.3, and 137.4.

A 122.7 Nam Achar ille cum uratus est linguam auream,L - Zz linguam regulam , uratus est EJS Zz juratus esset .

II. F. Not from S to P (. 5458)

I P S, g . I a g S. L Zz y P. 13.

II. G. Not from WLG to J

J g C (C II B), y S (Chapter II E). There are certain agreements between J and W. One can

y g y J WLG. Ithis section Lundstrm shows how this is not so. There are no corrections

Zz .

III. The Archetype

By the archetype Lundstrm reers to a state o the text beore its a b , g archetype o the sub-classes. Archetype thereore does not strictly reer


40/62


R . H g y -ing Zelzers corrections o many errors that had already appeared in the

y. H Zz 40.2.

III. A. Omissions (. 6378)

This section examines the instances o lacunae in the ms. text, mostoten in the archetype, and their bearing on a correct estimate o the text.

Zz P. 2, 2.71, 3.19, 11.8, 11.16, 11.25,49.3, 61.3 ( . 82), 61.4, 79.1, 83.1, 87.Q ( . 82), 87.4, 126.6, 175.Q, 184.3.

Lundstrm paid special attention to passages obelized or put between

cruces by Zelzer as corrupt or irredeemably problematic, and he hasprovided solutions in every case. At Prae.2 he commends Zelzer org M S g , . A 3.19, proditur, Zz gy a corruption. Lundstrm goes urther and restores the original word. At

49.3 Lundstrm wonderully elucidates, as incomprehensible exceptg G, L g Zz - . A 79.2 g Zz , L-

strm nds that his cruces, marking it as a corrupt text, are needless. He g g g .

N g y L y 11.8.

III. B. Miscellaneous errors (. 7881)

T g 74.1, 3.32, 61.3 4, 140.3.

Rufnuss Approach to Translation

W gg RB , ..,as a witness to the lost Greek text o the Small Asketikon, a careul estimateo Runuss translation techniques and o Basils editorial techniques in

Great Asketikon y . T - y .56 H y

56 A M. S, The Asketikon o St Basil the Great ( . 5 ), . 5: R-, W Small Asketikon, 10229, . 6: B Great Aske-tikon, 13045.


41/62

Introduction 31

in order, so that the reader may be implicitly aware o Runuss rhetorical

y .R y , g ,

, , 57

-plored.58 He candidly explains his approach to translation in the preacesto several works and is consistent in carrying out his intentions. Theollowing statement rom the preace to his translation o Gregory oNy Lie o Gregory Thaumaturgus y :

When experienced teachers o the Sacred Scriptures try to conveysomething rom the Greek language or Latin ears, they take care , . A y

g. F L G , would quite choke both the rhythm o speech and the sense o mean-

ing. And this is also true or us in translating the lie o GregoryThaumaturgus rom Attic speech. In recasting what the holy Gregory

o Nyssa composed in a oreign, that is, in the Greek tongue, wehave made many additions and many omissions, as the most suitable

g q, g gy -g L .59

In short, Runus sought to reashion his Greek source as a Latin workin its own right. In this more or less broad approach to translation he was

ollowing an established convention o both pre-Christian and Christian

57 Useul summary studies are Brooks, Translation Techniques, and Wagner,Runus the Translator, . . 3 ( . 14 ).

58 J. E. O, R T C Hy E,Journalo Theological Studies 30 (1929): 15074, deplores Runuss approach: But even whenno temptation lay upon him, Runus transgressed the bounds o reedom whichevery translator must be expected to observe. It is not merely that he eschews the Aq L I: y gunjustiable liberties with his original. He omits, abbreviates, transposes, expandsaccording to taste: and perhaps his avourite method is to produce a kind o para- g g .

59Sanctarum scripturarum doctores egregii, cum de graeca lingua latinis auribus traderealiquid statuerunt, non verbum verbo, sed sensum sensui reddere curaverunt. Et merito. Namsi latinus sermo graeco idiomati respondere voluerit, et euphoniae subtilitatem et rationissensum penitus suocat. Et nos beati Gregorii Thaumaturgi vitam ex loquela attica transer-entes, imitando eam quam sanctus Gregorius Nyssenus pontiex in peregrina, hoc est ingraeca lingua composuit, plurimis additis, plurimis ademptis, ut ratio utillima postulabat,sensum attendentes latinis viris compediose curavimus ministrare.For the text, see StephenMitchell, The Lie and Liveso Gregory Thaumaturgus, 99138 in Jan WillemDrijvers and John W. Watt, eds., Portraits o Spiritual Authority: Religious Power in EarlyChristianity, Byzantium and the Christian Orient (L: B, 1999), 132.


42/62


translators. The topic o translation theory was well canvassed by Jerome

L 57. I , R J .60

I g R , y g RBg G Great Aske-tikon. Although much o the Small Asketikon is more or less embeddedin the expanded Asketikon, the extant Greek text does not necessarilypreserve the Greek text Runus had beore him. One has to be constantly

alert also to Basils editorial techniques, which on occasion involve delet-

ing text, rening the expression o text, interpolating text, and eliding g .

With those provisos understood, we can now present a selective sum-

y R q, gy.

Preserving text loss rom the Greek.

Nothing is more welcome than when Runus preserves those smallpersonal interjections, I think, it seems to me, etc., that Basil later edited

. S j g y. F ,

RB 199.1 I g, g G: I y .

A y g RB 2.18: T y -able love o Godas I at any rate experience itwhich can be moreeasily experienced than spoken o, is a certain inexplicable light. This, y G.

W Sy , . A RB -

G . H state o the earlier text seems to have served Basil as a springboard torevise and expand his teaching, sometimes very considerably. It usually

aects only the nuances and not the substance o his doctrine. Examples

occur at RBas 1.5 (LR 1), RBas 6.411 (LR 10.1), RB 7.3, 510, 1113 (LR 15).

60 Much to Jeromes annoyance! C. Runuss preace to the Peri; Arcwn (NPNF,ser. 2, vol. 3, 42728) and hisApologia against Jerome (PL 21, cols. 541624, NPNF ser.2, . 3, B 1, . 14, 441; . 16, 442; . 19, 445; B 2, . 8, 463,

especially chap. 27a, 472), where he comments on Jeromes Letter 57, insisting that y g y J g translationthe same Jerome who had previously expressed his contempt overbatim y .


43/62

Introduction 33

T gg yg - g g . I B y g g

the topic a ar more extended treatment. The QF version o the text alters, g g - g g . I y g ,or the ability to discern good and evil. This is denitely not St Basilsthought. Here the RBas, rather than the QF, certainly preserves Basils .

Pleonasm

Runus requently expands his original text with words or evenphrases o explanation or interpretation. There are innumerable in-. H j , RB 123.Q. R glosses are in brackets. A translation o the present state o the Greek :

Why is it that sometimes upon the soul, (even) without much eort,

spontaneously as it were, a (kind o) sorrowing (o heart) alls upon

( G), ,so great a listlessness (or negligence) holds down (the soul) that even

though (a man) orces himsel, he cannot assume any (sorrow or) ( )?

SR 16.Q: Why is it that sometimes the soul eels compunction with-

, g y , , ,

y ?

For urther comparison, this is how it looks in a translation o theSy:

QF 109.Q: Why is it that sometimes, even without our making aneort, a sorrow alls upon our soul without toil, while at other times

even when we wish to experience this sorrow, and even constrain, ?

A , R y g g y y, y.


44/62


One o Runuss commonest orms o pleonasm is his use o doublets,

I y y, .., y, g with two terms. No doubt Runus is very aware o the multiple nuances

G y yusing two slightly dierent synonyms. But oten this duplication owords is redundant. The Latin text is studded with samples o this.

For example, RBas 1.Q ends with he could make a beginning any-where on the circle (or crown). Circle has received a perectly needless

yy.I g G ,

R g G yy:

RBas 170.Q: What is (worthy or) holy (which the Greeks call o{sion),

j?

I g g y Bhimsel uses hendiadys, perhaps due to later editorial revision, andR y .

Idiomatic and literary enhancement

H y y gg R enhance his text. He was constantly on the lookout or ways o ensuring

the rhetorical quality o his text and o naturalizing it as a Latin literary

work. As we have seen, he requently expresses more ully in a Latinidiom what is expressed tersely or elliptically in the Greek. Where hecan, he renders expressions more sharply or vividly. He is so conversant

gg idiomatic equivalent.He personalizes impersonal constructions, oten by using the rst person.

The ollowing are some examples o negotiations o vocabulary in R g gy: pavqo~ -monly translated as vitium, e.g., RBas 67.Q (SR 117); Qeovpneusto~ (literallyGod-breathed) as sanctum, e.g., RBas 1.6 (LR 1), where Qeopneuvstoi~Graai~ sanctis scripturis; ajdelovth~ rater-nitas ratres, ad ratres RB 196Q(SR 94.Q), 192.Q (SR 105.Q); th`/ ajdelovthti appears as inter ratres in RBas25.3 (SR 159). Eujlavbh~, .., y, y as religiosus, e.g., SR 171 (RBas 116), creiva as usus, as in RBas 95.4 (SR


45/62

Introduction 35

168), krivma sententia (y y) iudicium RB 100.1,2 (SR 169), gnhsivw~ as ex corde, as in RBas 23.12 (SR 16), RBas 27.Q (SR8), etc. In (RBas 159.1) he uses an idiomatic equivalent or the qualiying

tavca SR 55 qygputo, I .My R y RB 2.RBas 2.73 (LR 4) improves on the style o the Greek, inusing some Latin

g y pondus = g gravioris= . RB 2.77 (LR 5) g gy, -alising it by using a cohortative mood and expanding a single adjective,

ajnexavleipton, into a clause. In RBas2.99 (LR 6) the more dynamic Greek

perigevnesqai, g , , Runus employs variatio and creates a doublet with a shit o verbal: refectat et revocet, [] . I g g yg .

RBas 2.109-110: Then by reason o (the obstacles and) the tumults ( g) y , (g) ( yg ), y G. (W

y ) y . . .LR 6.2: Then by reason o the tumults and preoccupations withwhich the common lie is usually lled, the soul is unable to preserve

y G, y . . .

We can compare the Syriac translator, who also takes a liberal:

QF 2.109: Y g, g

in that mingled way o lie, he will be derauded o the memory o God, y .

T g y y R .

Consulting the Syriac

The present author has worked on a critical edition o the Syriac Quaes-tiones Fratrum, concurrently with updating the critical edition o theRegula Basilii.Some background inormation on the QFor the reader o RB .


46/62


The liberal approach to translation, the pre-Peshitta rendering o scrip-

tural citations, the archaic orthography o the best readings, and thepeculiar character and interests o the translator all suggest that the

Syriac translation o Basils Small Asketikon took place very early, certainly y, B . I ggy E S g G Sy-gworld. Eusebius was an older contemporary o Basil who appears tohave come to riendship with Basil during the consolidation o the Neo-

N 360. H y S the Euphrates to be one o Basils co-consecrators as bishop in September

o 370. From the evidence o eighteen or more surviving letters romBasil, he seems to have been Basils closest condante and riend during

y. W B y -g Sy , g g S.61 E or long. He died a martyr at the hand o an Arian assassin on his return

S , y B .The Syriac text has been collated rom the ve ollowing manuscripts,

y sigla, A E:

A. B Ly, A 14544; , 56 .

B. B Ly, A 14545; , 56 .

C. Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana (Vatican Library), sir. 122; parchment,

769.

D. V Ly, . 126; , 1226.

E. A Ly, M, Fg 10/34, . 38, 10 155164, , 89 .

Vy y, j gy QF:

61 On Basils contacts with Syriac-speaking Christians, see David G. K. Taylor, LesPres cappadociens dans la tradition syriaque, 4361 in Andrea B. Schmidt andDq G, ., Les Pres grecs dans la tradition syriaque, Syq 4

(Paris: Geuther, 2007); idem, Basil o Caesareas Contacts with Syriac-speakingC, Studia Patristica 32 (1997): 21319; Ty TheSyriac Versions o the De Spiritu Sancto by Basil o Caesarea, 2 . CSCO 576, 577 (L-: P, 1999).


47/62

Introduction 37

1. Gribomont,Histoire du Texte des Asctiques de Saint Basile, La versionsyriaque, 10848, especially at 10814. Marred by a ew typograph-

, y G

QF, being only interested in it as a witness to the lost Greek text, thismonument o philological enquiry nevertheless remains a touch- y QF.

2. Fedwick, Bibliotheca Basiliana Universalis 3: Ascetica,A ComparativeTable BetweenAsk 1r, Ask 1s and Ask 4, 915; iii. The Syriac Version:Ask 1s, 4346.

The Syriac translator only gradually became more liberal in his ap-proach as he progressed through BasilsAsketikon. He is quite capable g g y, g this vein. Only in QF 1.4 do we detect the translator recasting his textsomewhat and alluding to rather than actually citing a scriptural passage.

The glosses initially are o words and brie phrases, the kind o thingR . E QF 2, y - g A, gy the text. Then the glosses begin to lengthen, an entire sentence or two

yy g . T y QF 106, lengthy invented passage has been added at the end. Runus never went

nearly as ar as this. It seems that about halway through the QF theSy y y . P QF 69.2 g . T q . T y gg leave o his text, adding urther scriptural texts and paraphrasing and

ampliying so completely as to be making up his own text. Other ex-amples are QF 79 and QF 149. From then on he departs ever more reely

rom his text by recasting it and adding sizeable passages o his own. B g and teaching. It is precisely because we have such material that is veri-

ably o his own invention that we can build up a picture o the Syriac , y, .

It remains or us here to investigate to what extent Lundstrmsemendments o the Latin text can be supported or veried rom theSy . T -ing conrmation o the Greek text but o the Latin text, which on occasion


48/62


may refect a dierent text rom the Greek or the Syriac. Hence i theSyriac does not have Lundstrms emendment o the Latin it may be G,

here. In other cases where the Syriac is liberally paraphrasing or invent-g . W g , g in the Syriac. Strikethrough is used or cases where Lundstrm andZz g; g , , .

Prae.2, Prol.13, 2.Q, x2.2,2.25., 2.29, 2.70, 2.71,2.76, 2.97, 3.18,

3.19, 3.31, 3.32, 5.3, 8.11, 9.22, 10.1, 10.6., 11.8, x11.16, 11.25,11.35*, 11.39*, 14.1, 29.3, 34.3, 37.1, 40.2,45.3,49.3., 61.3*, 61.4,x63.3, 64.1, 67.Q, 68.Q, 70.2, 74.1, 77.2, 79.1, 79.2, 82.3, 83.1,87.Q*, 87.4, 88.Q, 92.2, 96.1, 101.2, 121.2, 121.6, 122.7, 122.8,123.Q, 123.11, 123.12, 126.6, 127.8., 130.3, x130.4, 137.4, 139.2,139.2(2nd), 139.3, 140.3, 145.1, 156.5, 164.Q, 171.1, 173.3, 173.4,184.Q,184.3, 186.1,190.Q, x195.9, 196.Q,196.4, 198.2, 199.1, 202.1,

202.2., 202.7.S .I 2.2 QF a RB, y Zz,

: the whole law and the prophets.The act that both the QF and RBas a lack a normalised scriptural citation

avours the retaining o Zelzers reading. On this argument the oldestLatin ms., S, would preserve not an archetype error, as Lundstrm argues,

but Runuss original text, and all later manuscripts, including the Greek

o the Great Asketikon, represent various instances o normalisation. Ipsagives the impression o being Runuss own attempt to add a certain , . S

L .RB 61.4 Sy , QF 62.4, g q . W {yztnd alw ( ) , , - vel movendo jy L . W aintest possibility o contamination, and the chance o coincidencebeing too much to ask, this surely is an endorsement o Zelzers reading

against Lundstrms emendation. Here too there is enough independent

Zz g.The lack o et in Zelzers text o RBas 63.3 is paralleled by its absence

rom QF 64.3. The Syriac translator is usually exceedingly liberal in using

Pa (too/also/even), so its lack here points to an archaic orm o text.


49/62

Introduction 39

QF translates: as the Apostle says or in accordance with what theA y, y g G .But in this case the overriding principle is our concern with the integrity

o the Latin text, and the appearance o et as part o the introductoryphrase maxime cum et (especially when the Apostle too says) suggests g R .W L Zz.

I RB 130.4 et. H QF 117.4 Latin with an earlier use o et in the sentence, but, as in Zelzers choice,lacks the second instance. The case turns on the very slim hazards og . T Sy d (), w (), G g S GreatAsketikon. We might have some modest case or maintaining Zelzers, , L .

I RB 195.9, I 5:14, L Zzplural uvas with the singular uva, ollowing the singular staulhvn o theSg . QF 178.9, , abn\[, this is supported by the plural marker, seyame,which appears in all ., g ( /y -). A gy G

and the Latin words. Each has one term encompassing a singular mean-g, g, g, g. A these words could all either way in translation. Lundstrms marshalling

o evidence is sound. He even quotes Runus elsewhere citing the same

scriptural passage using a singular noun, so Lundstrms emendation .

To turn now to the cases o conrmation: what a testimony it is toL L y

emendments are corroborated by the Syriac text, o which he knew nothing.I y g g .

RB 45.3 g the evil man (malus homo) bringsorth evil thingsrom the evil store o his heart (M 12:35). Fg mss., Zelzer jettisoned homo, mistaking it or a Vulgate normalisation.B G oJ ponhro;~ a[nqrwpo~, L malus homo L .QF 45.3 acyb arBg.

In RBas 49.3 the linchpin o a very technical elucidation o the conused

L L usu eorum quae desideramus j perrui. QF 50.3 , ajyn(/) g .


50/62


RB 74.1 y gy. I g the parable, And seeing this, it says, his ellow servants told their master,Zelzer has audientes, i.e. hearing, corrected by Lundstrm to videntes,

seeing. The Syriac conrms this withwzj dkw

and when they saw. . . .I RB 139.3 y g , g incident(will all into) and incedunt (tread/step upon), two dierent verbs,each o which can t the context. Lundstrm validated incident as the

better reading. QF 125.2 backs this up withtktcm (sinking/subsiding),

gg .RBas 184.Q conrms, although it concerns a ne nuance, devocare

versus revocare. The restored Latin has in irritum devocare quod male ueratdefnitum,that he call o as invalid what was wickedly decided. QF184.Q wkphml Qsp tyacybd Mdm whS y .

I RB 190.Q L quasi. Aissue are not only the variants o the Latin text but also weighty variants

in the Greek mss. o the Great Asketikon and in the printed editions.Amidst this maze o variants in three languages, QF 175.Q lends support

L atylwb -y .

T y y Sy g g g L , I some o these cases in the English translation. I will discuss just one here,

g a[delovth~ () y, .., y.

There is a certain anti-monastic reading o Basils Small Asketikon,which I have discussed beore.62 Gribomont was its protagonist, and

Fedwick ollowed his cue.63

An anti-institutional animus seems to inspire, g y Zeitgeist 1960and 1970s than to evidence o the texts. Misconstruing Basils use o

62 S S,Asketikon o St Basil the Great, 23 . 11; 29 . 19, 20. My y ascetic doctrine in the Small Asketikon is ound in chapter 2, The Ascetic Community T V B A, 1937. My -ment o Basils amily and in his own lie and doctrine is ound in chapter 4, TheEg C M F Cy A, 51101.

63 S P J. F, The Church and the Charisma o Leadership in Basil o Caesarea(T: P I M S, 1979). T , , a very idiosyncratic hermeneutic, sweepingly misconstrues the character o Basils Small Asketikon.


51/62

Introduction 41

generically Christian terminology in his ascetic writings, the idea is that

in the Small Asketikon Basil is tentatively oering advice to casual groups C g ,

leave it as they please. The evidence o dedicated, disciplined communi- , g y y G- y Great Asketikon, y . Not.

Gribomont, or example, several times avers in print that a[delovth~as the title or a dedicated ascetic community occurs only in the GreatAsketikon.64 Already in a comparison o the RBas and the Greek o theGreat Asketikon it was possible to iner that Runus had paraphrasedinstances where the Greek uses the noun or brotherhood by using a ormo brothers instead. Comparison with the QF now conrms such an, zz y G, Sy very well, missed it. In RBas 6.9 (the only case in which Runus actually

usesraternitas), 194.Q, 196.Q and 4, we nd the Syriac using the substan- atwja() G a[delovth~, but where Runus or his part uses a orm oratres. RBas 6.9is particularly valuable, since at this point in the Great Asketikon Basilconsiderably editorializes and expands his text, and the relevant passage

Small Asketikon .H L corpori rater-nitatis Sy atwjad argpb, y , : () y .

Variant recensions o the Greek Small Asketikon

I QF RB Great Asketikon, ycases o a Syriac/Greek alliance against the Latin are to be ound. Not all

R . S :

QF 112.5 M 6:31, g G it immediately ollowing in QF 113.Q as part o the question; QF13.1, g Sy/G, in RBas 11.39. In QF 18.5, Gk/Syr show up an odd passage at thevery end o RBas 16.5, as i he is translating a scribal error in his

64 S, , G, L q . B, Irnikon 31 (1958): 282307, 299, , S B, Thologiede la vie monastique, tudes sur la tradition patristique, Facult de Thologie S.J. deLy-F (P: A, 1961), 99113, 106.


52/62


G ; QF 19.2 P 13:13 G, RB 17.2uses Sir 19:1, QF 112.5 omits Matt 6:31 but in agreement with theG y g QF 113.Q q.

An accumulation o such instances gives an impression that there may

G y two translators. Might there have been at least two recensions o theSmall Asketikon, y , 365370?

One historical hypothesis is that the Greek text behind the RBas P y y, y B M O . T g y 366.

T Small Asketikon QF - g y y, y y 368369, was this slightly revised version, with three extra pieces, that perhapsE S 370 B .

A y, y -nundrum. I the RBas has behind it an earlier Greek text, why does it q/

QF? Since most o the missing items in the QF are all in a single bloc(RBas 106118), one wonders whether something very simple and prag-

: q ,y, g g .

And whence the three questions/answers that appear only in the QF?

The ollowing hypothesis suggests itsel. We know clearly enough theprocess rom oral delivery to edited written text. The tachygraphers took

down notes during the visits o the renowned monastic ather to various

, P g , C.There was a systematic in-gathering o these notes, or air copies maderom these notes, which became the basis o editorial work by Basil. P extravagantes g yg-phers notes, rom one particular community or example, that somehow

g , - 360 gy SmallAsketikon.


53/62

Introduction 43

Abbreviations

RB: Regula Basilii, R L B Small Asketikon.

L1

: Sven Lundstrm, review o Zelzer s edition o the RBas, published inGnomon 60 (M 1988): 58790.

L2: Sven Lundstrm, Die berlieerung der lateinischen Basiliusregel, ActaUniversitatis Upsaliensis, Studia Latina Upsaliensia 21(Uppsala: AcademiaU, 1989).

SR: Shorter Rules o the Great Asketikon, Pontic/Vulgate recension (FedwicksA 4), Regulae Brevius Tractatae, PG 31 . 1079-1506.

LR: Longer Rules o the Great Asketikon, Pontic/Vulgate recension (Fedwicks

A 4), Regulae Fusius Tractatae, PG 31 . 889-1052.QF: Quaestiones Fratrum/Questions o the Brothers, the Syriac translation o

B Small Asketikon.

Zelz.: Klaus Zelzer, Basili RegulaA Rufno Latine Versa, Corpus ScriptorumEcclesiasticorum Latinorum 86 (Vienna: Hlder-Pichler-Tempsky, 1986).


54/62

44

Regula Basilii

T y y K Zz,1 Fy2007. Justications or emendations to the Latin text are ound in the. Pgg y Eg.

Praeatio2

1 S , U,

et desiderantes iam ratrum consueta consortia monasterium tuumingressi sumus, quod superpositum angusto arenosi tramitis dorso hinc

q ; 2 latentes locos eminus arguit pinus,3 ex qua et Pineti clarum nomen .4

3 E , q , q , de locis vel de opibus orientis sollicite percontatus es, 4 sed quaenam ibi

observatio servorum dei haberetur, quae animi virtus, quae instituta

q.

1Basili RegulaA Runo Latine Versa (V: H-P-Ty, 1986).2 S y M S: Ty R

Pg Rg S B, 23941 Tyranni Runi Opera, CCSL 20 (T-: B, 1961).

3Rara . . . pinus: .4Decidit, L2 6465; saeculo dedit Zz., -

pected, which Lundstrm has now supplied. Zelzer rightly rejected Simonettisj saeculum, g saeculo MSS GL. Rexpresses to Ursacius a courteous analogy: as a cone drops rom a pine to the ground, P .


55/62

45

The Rule o Basil

Preace

Letter o Runus To Ursacius o Pinetum

1 M U, and we were already longing again or the accustomed ellowship obrothers, how gladly we entered that monastery o yours, sited there g y y, and that by the waves o the shiting and uncertain sea. 2 Only a scat-

g ,1 P .2

3 But we were especially delighted in this, that you did not, as is the way

with others, press inquiries about the places or riches o the East. 4 Instead,

you asked eagerly about the observance o the servants o God there, , .

1 W. K. L. C, The Ascetic Works o Saint Basil (L: SPCK, 1925), 2829 . 1,puzzles over a monastery situated above (superpositum) the ridge and the places lyinghidden (latentes). H g gg g.

2 The location o Pinetum has been matter o some debate. Earlier opinion, e.g.,Clarke,Ascetic Works, 28, placed it on the upper Adriatic coast near Ravenna, evidentlybecause Jordanis in his History o the Goths spoke o an ancient pine orest calledPinetum R. L near Terracina on the Tyrrhenian coast, some eighty kilometers south o Rome. FrancisX. Murphy, Rufnus o Aquileia (Washington, DC: CUA Press, 1945), 90, says in avouro the Terracina location: I believe the notice o Paulinus o Nola (Letter 47) mention-ing the act that Cerealis would have to go out o his way on the journey between

N R R, yg P, ; y taken in conjunction with Runuss answer in his Prae. ad De bened. patriarcharumII,2. T R N y g C VL, L/S y.


56/62

46 The Rule o St Basil in Latin

5 Ad haec ego ne quid tibi minus digne, non dico quam geritur sed quam

geri debet, exponerem, 6 sancti Basilii Cappadociae episcopi, viri de et

operibus et omni sanctitate satis clari, instituta monachorum, quae inter-

rogantibus se monachis velut sancti cuiusdam iuris responsa statuit,protuli. 7 Cuius cum denitiones ac sententias mirareris, magnopere L, 8 q universa occiduae partis monasteria si haec sancti et spiritualis viri sancta

, 9 qui ex huiuscemodi institutionibus nasceretur, mihi quoque ex eorum q g .

10 Exhibui ergo ut potui ministerium meum: imple et tu et omnes qui

legitis et observatis gratiam, ut et agentes et orantes sic quemadmodum , qq . 11 T etiam aliis monasteriis exemplaria praebere, ut secundum instar Cap-padociae omnia monasteria eisdem et non diversis vel institutis vel .


57/62

The Rule o St Basil in English 47

5 T y q I y I y y unworthy, I say, not o mysel, but o the dignity o the subject6 I bring

orth rom the holy Basil, bishop o Cappadocia, a man greatly renowned

or aith and works and or every mark o holiness, his Institutes orM, -3 who questioned him. 7 For when you were admiring his denitions and

, y gg gy L,8 g y y g west, 9 the great progress that would accrue to the servants o God rom

precepts like these would, through their merits and prayers, bring me g .

10 I have exerted mysel, thereore, to the best o my ability: do you ull

y , y y ,and remember me as you act and pray in accordance with the contento these statutes. 11 Make it your task to provide copies also or othermonasteries, so that, ater the likeness o Cappadocia, all the monasteries

y y , y .4

3 T gy R , yg y y j -y- . Tis not such an inaccurate idea o Basils approach, which is to look on Scripture asthe God-breathed testimony o the Lords commandments to be used, quite literally,y, , C , C on his own role as merely a dispenser o the scriptural word, understood with thesensibility o the aith o the church and lived in the testimony o the Holy Spirit.Thus Runus, in looking to Basil himsel and his Rule as a statutory source oauthority, and even in using the term monks, refects a certain institutionalizing omonastic lie and the canonizing o the holy orthodox athers as guarantors in their C .

4 H B -ary ormula variously put, e.g., The Preace o the Rule o holy Basil the Bishop. T g . . . C; I . T y B B I g . . . G; T R y B B Institute o monks begins . . . H; Here begins the teaching o the holy Basil Bishop C . . . M; T P ; g I monks, dispensed by the holy Basil to seniors who questioned him . . . P; ThePg . H g yg y B B . . . S.


58/62

48 The Rule o St Basil in Latin

Prologue(Zz 57, QF Pg, 111 SRPg [PG 31.1080], 1220 LR Pg[9001])

1 Humanum genus diligens deus et docens hominum scientiam his quidemquibus docendi contulit gratiam praecipit per apostolumpermanere indoctrina, 2 his vero qui aedicari divinis institutionibus indigent perMy Interroga patrem tuum et annuntiabit tibi, pres-byteros tuos et dicent tibi.

3 P q q q -tum est, in omni tempore paratos esse et promptos ad instructionem

perectionemque animarum,4

et quaedam quidem in communi ecclesiaeauditorio simul omnibus de praeceptis domini contestari, quaedam vero

qq , 5 q q -rogare volentibus de de et veritatem evangelii domini nostri Iesu Christi

et de conversatione perecta copiam nostri acultatemque praebere, 6 quo

perectus homo dei.


59/62

The Rule o St Basil in English 49

Prologue

1 God who loves the human race5 and who teaches man knowledge (Ps 94:10),through the Apostle commands those on whom he has bestowed the gi

excerpt st basil's rule

Documents