(new testament and the greek fathers no. 1 ) bart d. ehrman-didymus the blind and the text of the...

8/19/2019 (New Testament and the Greek Fathers No. 1 ) Bart D. Ehrman-Didymus the Blind and the Text of the Gospels (N…

1/304

DIDYMUS THE BLIND AND THE

T E X T OF THE GOSPELS


2/304

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LI TE RAT URE

The New Testament in the Greek Fathers

Edited by

Gordon D. Fee

Number 1DIDYMUS THE BLIN D AN D THE

TEXT OF THE GOSPELS

by

Bart D. Ehrman


3/304

D I D Y M U S T H E B L I N D A N D T H E

T E X T O F T H E G O S P E L S

Bart D. Ehrman

Scholars Press Atlanta, Georgia


4/304

DIDYMUS THE BLIND AND T HE

T E X T OF THE GOSPELS

Bart D. Ehrman

p 1986

The Society of Biblical Literature

Li brary of Congress Cataloging in Publica tion Dat a

Ehrman, Bart D.

Dtdymus the Blind and the text of the Gospels.

(New Testament and the Greek Fathers ; no. 1)Bibliography: p.

1. Bible. N.T. Gospels -Criticism, Textual.2. Didymus, of Alexandria, the Theologian, ca.31 3-ca. 398—Knowledge—Alexandrian test of the

Gospels. I. Title. II. Series.

BS2551.A26D534 1986 226\048'0924 86-24845

ISBN 1-55540-083-3 (alk. paper)ISBN 1-55540-084-1 (pbk. : alk. paper)

Printed in the United States of Americaon acid-free paper


5/304

To Cindy


6/304


7/304

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgments i x

E d i t o r ' s P r e f a c e x i

I n t r o d u c t i o n 1

C h a p t e r I Didynms a s a W i t n e s s to th e T e x t of th e

G o s p e l s : M e t h d o l o g i c a l Problems 4

P a t r i s t i c S o u r c e s : T h e i r S i g n i f i c a n c e and

C o m p l e x i t i e s 4

The Use of C r i t i c a l E d i t i o n s 7S o u r c e A n a l y s i s 7

T e x t u a l R e c o n s t r u c t i o n 12

The S p e c i a l s i g n i f i c a n c e and P e c u l i a r

Problems of Didymus as a T e x t u a l

W i t n e s s 17

C h a p t e r I I I n t r o d u c t i o n to th e T e x t and C r i t i c a l

A p p a r a t u s 30P r e s e n t a t i o n of th e T e x t 31

The C r i t i c a l A p p a r a t u s 34

A b b r e v i a t i o n s u s e d i n the A p p a r a t u s 37

C h a p t e r I I I T e x t and A p p a r a t u s 38

G o s p e l of Matthew 38

G o s p e l of Mark 88

G o s p e l of Luke 91G o s p e l of John 124

I n d e t e r m i n a b l e R e f e r e n c e s and Complex

C o n f l a t i o n s 172

C h a p t e r I V The G o s p e l T e x t of Didymus: Q u a n t i t a t i v e

A n a l y s i s 187

Didymus"s A f f i n i t i e s i n Matthew 190

R e s i d u a l M e t h o d o l o g i c a l C o n c e r n s 195

Didymus's A f f i n i t i e s i n Mark 202

v i i


8/304

Didymus's A f f i n i t i e s i n Luke 204

Didymus's A f f i n i t i e s i n John 207

Didymus's Te xt of th e Fou r Go sp el s 218

Ch ap te r V The Gos pel Te xt of Didymus: GroupP r o f i l e s 223

P r o f i l e One: In te r- Gr ou p Rea din gs 228

P r o f i l e Two: In tr a- Gr ou p Rea din gs 234

P r o f i l e T h r e e : Combination I n t e r -

and In tr a- Gr ou p Rea din gs 238

P r o f i l e F o u r : Didymus's R e l a t i o n s h i p

t o A l e x a n d r i a n W i t n e s s e s 243

Cha pte r VI Co nc lu si on s 254

Methods o f T e x t u a l A n a l y s i s a nd

C l a s s i f i c a t i o n 254

T he C h a r a c t e r a nd H i s t o r y o f t h e

A l e x a n d r i a n T e x t 258

The Western T e x t i n A l e x a n d r i a 258

T he B y z a n t i n e T e x t i n A l e x a n d r i a 259

T he c a e s a r e a n T e x t i n A l e x a n d r i a 2 61

The E a r l y an d L a t e A l e x a n d r i a n

Texts 262

26 Appendix One: Didymus i n t h e Apparatus o f NA 268

3 Appendix Two: Didymus i n t h e Apparatus o f UBS , 274

B i b l i o g r a p h y 2 7 6

v i i i


9/304

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

T h i s book grew out of th e d i s s e r t a t i o n I s u b m i t t e d to thef a c u l t y of P r i n c e t o n T h e o l o g i c a l Seminary i n 1985. I would

e s p e c i a l l y l i k e t o e x p r e s s my g r a t i t u d e to th e t h r e e mem-

b e r s of my d i s s e r t a t i o n committee, each of whom made s i g n i

f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o my l a b o r s : Bruce M. Metzger, who

spawned i n me an i n t e r e s t i n the a n a l y s i s of th e P a t r i s t i c

w i t n e s s e s of the NT t e x t , and whose t e x t u a l e x p e r t i s e guided

me throughout the e n t i r e p r o j e c t ; C u l l e n I K S t o r y , whose

m e t i c u l o u s a t t e n t i o n t o d e t a i l has always been a s o u r c e of

a d m i r a t i o n ; and David R. Adams, whose i n t u i t i v e s e n s e f o r

c r i t i c a l method c o n t i n u e s to i n s p i r e r i g o r i n h i s s t u d e n t s .

Thanks a re a l s o due E l i z a b e t h Johnson of New Brunswick Theo

l o g i c a l Seminary f o r much g e n e r o s i t y and many h e l p f u l sugges

t i o n s , and to my f r i e n d J e f f r e y S i k e r who r e a d p o r t i o n s of the

MS and gave c o n t i n u a l encouragement.

Anyone who r e a d s t h i s s t u d y w i l l r e a l i z e the e x t e n t t o

which I am i n d e b t e d to th e s c h o l a r s h i p of Gordon D. Fee.

From the v e r y b e g i n n i n g of my work h i s p u b l i c a t i o n s have

s e r v e d as a model of c a r e f u l r e s e a r c h , and I have c o n s i d e r e d

i t my g r e a t f o r t u n e to be a b l e to work w i t h him as the g e n e r a l

e d i t o r of t h i s p r o j e c t .

I would a l s o l i k e to extend my thanks to Dennis Ford

o f S c h o l a r s P r e s s , who has always been prompt and w i l l i n g t o

p r o v i d e t h e a s s i s t a n c e I have needed.

My d e ep e s t a p p r e c i a t i o n goes t o my w i f e Cindy whose l o v e

a n d p a t i e n c e have been my s t e a d y companions throughout the

c o u r s e of my work. I t i s to her t h a t I have d e d i c a t e d t h i s

book.

i x


10/304


11/304

EDITOR'S PREFACE

Th e u s e f u l n e s s o f P a t r i s t i c c i t a t i o n s f o r New Testament

t e x t u a l c r i t i c i s m has long been r e c o g n i z e d . I n d e e d , when a

F a t h e r ' s t e x t can be jud ged as c e r t a i n ( e . g . when h e p r o v i d e s

commentary on the very words o f h i s t e x t or notes a l t e r n a t i v e

r e a d i n g s ) , i t p r o v i d e s d a t a b l e p r i m a r y e v i d e n c e f o r t h e New

Testament t e x t i n a g i v e n g e o g r a p h i c a l l o c a t i o n .

U n f o r t u n a t e l y , however, t h a t u s e f u l n e s s , both f o r s c h o l a r

and student a l i k e , has been m i t i g a t e d by tw o f a c t o r s . F i r s t ,

t h e a v e r a g e s c h o l a r o r s t u d e n t h a s v e r y l i t t l e a c c e s s t o t h e

d a t a , which by and l a r g e ar e the pro vi nc e of th e s p e c i a l i s t

a l o n e — a n d even t h e s p e c i a l i s t a t t i m e s h a s c o n s i d e r a b l e d i f

f i c u l t y g e t t i n g a t some o f t h e m a t e r i a l , o r a t o t h e r t i m e s

knowing how to. e v a l u at e what he or she does have a c c e s s t o .

Second, what a c c e s s most people do have to the data, namely i n

t h e c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n s , i s h o p e l e s s l y i n a d e qu a t e . T h i s i s

e s p e c i a l l y t r u e , f o r example, o f t h e o t h e r w i s e u s e f u l U n i t e d

B i b l e S o c i e t i e s Greek New Testament, where t h e r e a r e s o many

i n a c c u r a c i e s t h a t even t h e c o r r e c t data are not u s e f u l , s i n c eone can never know which a r e c o r r e c t and which ar e no t.

What h a s been l a c k i n g i s an adequate and a c c e s s i b l e

p r e s e n t a t i o n a nd e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e s e d a t a , e s p e c i a l l y of the

Greek F a t h e r s , where to dat e onl y t h a t of Clement o f A l e x a n d r i a

i s a v a i l a b l e (M. Mees, D i e Z i t a t e aus dem Neuen Testament b e i

Clemens v on A l e x a n d r i e n [Rome, 19 70 ]; who ha s a f u l l p r e s e n

t a t i o n o f t h e d a t a , a l t h o u g h t h e e v a l u a t i o n l e a v e s some t h i n g s

t o be d e s i r e d ) .T h e p r e s e n t volume r e p r e s e n t s t h e f i r s t i n a new s e r i e s

whose aim i s to f i l l up t h i s l a c u n a . T he j u s t i f i c a t i o n for

t h e s e r i e s can be found in Dr. Ehrman's I n t r o d u c t i o n , p p. 1-3.

L e t me here sim ply se t out the g u i d e l i n e s : (1) The s e r i e s

w i l l present the NT t e x t u a l d at a fo r the Greek F a t h e r s ; ( 2)

o n l y d a t a a v a i l a b l e from c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n s o f t h e F a t h e r s '

t e x t s w i l l be inc lu de d; (3) each volume w i l l i n c l u d e a f u l l

p r e s e n t a t i o n of the NT da ta (or p a r t s th er eo f) of a gi ve nF a t h e r or s e l e c t e d works of a given Fathtsr; (4) each p re se n

t a t i o n w i l l a l s o i n c l u d e a minimal e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e F a t h e r ' s

x i


12/304

x i i

c i t a t i o n s , a s t o h i s c i t i n g h a b i t s , t h e r e l i a b i l i t y of his

d a t a , and th e degree o f c e r t a i n t y w i t h which one may us e th e

d a t a ; and f i n a l l y (5) the a u t h o r w i l l o f f e r a n a n a l y s i s o f t h et e x t u a l d a t a as to the Father's p l a c e in the h i s t o r y of th e NT

t e x t , e s p e c i a l l y i n terms o f t e x t u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h the

o t h e r a v a i l a b l e d a t a . I t i s hoped t h a t s u c h a p r e s e n t a t i o n

w i l l i n c r e a s e o ur o v e r a l l c o n f i d e n c e i n th e us e of th e

F a t h e r ' s t e x t u a l d a t a .

I t i s a p l e a s u r e t o i n t r o d u c e t he s e r i e s w i t h Dr. Ba r t

Ehrman's a n a l y s i s o f t h e t e x t o f t h e f o u r G o s p e l s a s i t i s

c i t e d i n the commentaries of Didymus t h e B l i n d found a t Toura

i n 1941. Dr. Ehrman has not o n l y g i v e n us a f u l l p r e s e n t a t i o n

and a n a l y s i s o f t h e d a t a , b u t h a s a l s o o f f e r e d some r e f i n e

ments of method i n t h e t a s k of a n a l y s i s t h a t h e l p us to move

toward g r e a t e r c e r t a i n t y i n t h a t t a s k . T h i s i s an a u s p i c i o u s

b e g i n n i n g o f a s e r i e s t h a t we t r u s t w i l l prove u s e f u l f o r t h e

ongoing t a s k of NT t e x t u a l c r i t i c i s m , e s p e c i a l l y i n o ur

a b i l i t y someday t o w r i t e t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e t e x t w i t h even

g r e a t e r c l a r i t y .

Perhaps o t h e r younger s c h o l a r s w i l l now be encouraged t o

l o o k toward t h i s a s p e c t of t e x t u a l c r i t i c i s m a s a p o s s i b l e

a r e a f o r t h e i r d i s s e r t a t i o n s , s i n c e t h i s s e r i e s o f f e r s them a

p o s s i b l i t y o f p u b l i c a t i o n .

GORDON D. FEE


13/304

I n t r o d u c t i o n

R e c e n t y e a r s have w i t n e s s e d a renewed i n t e r e s t i n th e

a n a l y s i s and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of NT documentary e v i d e n c e . T h i s

r e n e w a l h a d i t s r o o t s i n m e t h o d o l o g i c a l c o n c e r n s , a s a p

p r o a c h e s t a k e n t o e s t a b l i s h i n g t e x t u a l c o n s a n g u i n i t y were s y s

t e m a t i z e d a n d o b j e c t i f i e d . Two new methods o f a n a l y s i s were

d e v i s e d , one a q u a n t i t a t i v e method d e s i g n e d t o demonstrate on

s t a t i s t i c a l grounds t h e t e x t u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s of NT documents,

the other a p r o f i l e method used t o c l a s s i f y w i t n e s s e s a c c o rd

i n g t o t h e i r p a t t e r n s o f a t t e s t a t i o n o f r e a d i n g s . These

developments l e d t o t h e p u b l i c a t i o n o f s e v e r a l a n a l y s e s o f

s i g n i f i c a n t t e x t u a l wi tn e ss es , i n c l u d i n g MSS N and W and the

c h u r c h F a t h e r s O r i g e n , Chrysostom, and Hi pp ol yt us , as w e l l as

t o s e v e r a l imp orta nt sk et ch es of th e NT MS t r a d i t i o n s .

The pre se nt stu dy se ek s, as d i d most o f i t s p r e d e c e s s o r s ,

t o u t i l i z e and r e f i n e methods o f t e x t u a l a n a l y s i s now common

i n t h e f i e l d . F a r from d i s c u s s i n g methodology on ly i n th e

a b s t r a c t , however, t h e s t u d y h a s a s i t s p r i m a r y o b j e c t i v e t h e

a p p l i c a t i o n o f a r e f i n e d method of a n a l y s i s to ye t ano the r

s i g n i f i c a n t t e x t u a l w i t n e s s , Didymus t h e B l i n d .

As an e c c l e s i a s t i c a l l e a d e r i n f o u r t h - c e n t u r y A l e x a n d r i a ,

Didymus i s an important l i n k i n t h e g r e a t c h a i n o f t e x t u a l

t r a n s m i s s i o n . A l e x a n d r i a was famous f o r i t s c l a s s i c a l s c h o l

a r s h i p a nd i s commonly r e p u t e d t o have p r e s e r v e d , from e a r

l i e s t t i m e s , t h e p u r e s t form of NT t e x t . F u r t h e r m o r e , s e v e r a l

of the most i mp o rt a n t A l e x a n d r i a n w i t n e s s e s , i n c l u d i n g c o d i c e s

K and B, were p r o b a b l y produced d u r i n g Didymus's l i f e t i m e .

Thus a study of Didymus's NT quo ta ti on s can be ex pec te d toshow whether t h e s e o t h e r w i t n e s s e s a d e q u a t e l y r e p r e s e n t t h e

A l e x a n d r i a n t r a d i t i o n of the l a t e f o u r t h c e n t u r y . I n a d d i

t i o n , Didymus's t e x t may c a s t l i g h t on somewhat b r o a d e r ques

t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e t r a n s m i s s i o n o f t h e NT: i t may i l l u

minate, f o r example, t h e h i s t o r i c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p between the

s o - c a l l e d " E a r l y " a nd " L a t e " A l e x a n d r i a n t e x t s , and i t may

show t h e e x t e n t t o which other types of t e x t i n f l u e n c e d t h e

A l e x a n d r i a n t r a d i t i o n .

1


14/304

2/ Didymus and th e Go sp el s

The s c i e n t i f i c study of Didymus's t e x t of the N T — i n t h i s

c a s e , o f t h e f ou r G o s p e l s — h a s become p o s s i b l e o n l y w i t h i n t h e

p a s t s e v e r a l ye ar s. I n 1941, i n a gr ot to near Toura, Egypt,E g y p t i a n workers a c c i d e n t a l l y u ne ar th ed n e a r l y 2000 pages of

papyrus MSS. In cl ud ed among t h e s e s i x t h - o r s e v e n t h - c e n t u r y

p a p y r i were fragmentary c o p i e s o f h i t h e r t o unknown e x p o s i t o r y

works of Didymus. C r i t i c a l e d i t i o n s o f t h e s e commentaries on

G e n e s i s , J o b , Psalms, E c c l e s i a s t e s , a n d Z e c h a r i a h have s l o w l y

appeared s i n c e 1968. I n them Didymus quotes e x t e n s i v e l y from

the NT Gos pel s. The pr es en t study re pr es en ts the f i r s t f u l l -

s c a l e t e x t u a l a n a l y s i s of th es e qu ot at io ns . The a n a l y s i s

fo cu se s on thr ee ki nd s of i s s u e s : (1) Me th od ol og ic al : How

c a n t h e t e x t u a l a f f i n i t i e s of Didymus's Gospel qu ot at ion s and

a l l u s i o n s best be determined? ( 2) T e x t u a l : What ar e th es e

a f f i n i t i e s ? (3) H i s t o r i c a l : What does Didymus's Gospel t e x t

r e v e a l about the tr an sm is si on of the NT i n Al ex an dr ia ?

M e t h o d o l o g i c a l i s s u e s ar e add res sed a t the ou ts et of t he

s t u d y . Chapter I c o n s i d e r s t h e problems t h a t a r e unique t o

a n a l y s e s of the P a t r i s t i c witnesses to the NT t e x t . The chap

t e r pays p a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n t o t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e of Didymus

a s a t e x t u a l w i t n e s s an d t o t h e p e c u l i a r d i f f i c u l t i e s encoun

t e r e d i n the a n a l y s i s o f h i s Gospel q u o t a t i o n s a nd a l l u s i o n s .

A major po rt io n of the study i s devoted t o a p r e s e n t a t i o n

of Didymus's Gospel t e x t . Chapter I I i n t r o d u c e s and e x p l a i n s

t h e format of t h i s p r e s e n t a t i o n , which i t s e l f i s then giv en i n

Chapter I I I . T he p r e s e n t a t i o n i n c l u d e s a f u l l l i s t i n g of

e v e r y Gospel quo tat ion and a l l u s i o n found i n Didymus's w r i t

i n g s , and a c r i t i c a l a p p a r a t u s which s u p p l i e s f u l l c o l l a t i o n s

o f r e p r e s e n t a t i v e t e x t u a l w i t n e s s e s a t e v e r y p o i n t .

These da t a a r e s u b j e c t e d t o a d e t a i l e d a n a l y s i s i n Chap

t e r s IV and V. Chapter I V u s e s a q u a n t i t a t i v e method t o

demonstrate t h e p r o x i m i t y o f Didymus's t e x t t o i n d i v i d u a l

r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of the major s t r a n d s o f t h e t e x t u a l t r a d i t i o n .

Chapter V supplements t h i s a n a l y s i s by examining Didymus's

s u p p o r t o f r e a d i n g s t h a t c h a r a c t e r i z e e a c h o f t h e t e x t u a l

groups, i r r e s p e c t i v e of t h e i r a t t e s t a t i o n i n any gi v en

w i t n e s s . F o r t h i s purpose a whole new s l a t e o f p r o f i l e s of


15/304

I n t r o d u c t i o n /3

group r e a d i n g s i s proposed and u t i l i z e d .

The f i n a l c h a p t e r summarizes t h e i m p o r t a n t m e t h o d o l o g i c a l

r e f i n e m e n t s made i n t h e c o u r s e of th e s t u d y , and d e m o n s t r a t e st h e s i g n i f i c a n c e of th e a n a l y s i s f o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e h i s t o r y

o f t h e t e x t a s i t was t r a n s m i t t e d i n A l e x a n d r i a . P a r t i c u l a r

a t t e n t i o n i s p a i d h e r e t o t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p of th e f o u r t h -

c e n t u r y A l e x a n d r i a n t e x t w i t h o t h e r known t e x t u a l groups, and

t o t h e h i s t o r i c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s of th e A l e x a n d r i a n subgroups.

T h e s t u d y c o n c l u d e s w i t h two a p p e n d i c e s . The f i r s t

i n d i c a t e s where t h e t e s t i m o n y o f Didymus c a n now be c i t e d o r26

c o r r e c t e d i n t h e a p p a r a t u s of NA . T he s e c o n d p r o v i d e s

s i m i l a r i n f o r m a t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o UBSGNT .


16/304

Chapter I

Didymus as a Wi tn es s t o th e Te xt of th e G os pe ls : M e t h o d o l o g i c a l Problems

A n a l y s e s o f P a t r i s t i c w i t n e s s e s t o t h e NT t e x t e n c o u n t e r

a number o f s e r i o u s m e t h o d o l o g i c a l problems. T h e s e problems

a r e of two s o r t s : t h o s e i n h e r e n t i n t h e P a t r i s t i c s o u r c e s

g e n e r a l l y and th os e uniq ue to the works o f e a c h c h u r c h F a t h e r .

F o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y , b o t h s e t s o f problems

c a n b e c o n s i d e r e d w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o t h e e x t a n t w r i t i n g s o f

Didymus t h e B l i n d .

P a t - r i s t i c S o u r c e s : T h e i r S i g n i f i c a n c e a nd C o m p l e x i t i e s

NT s c h o l a r s a g r e e t h a t t h e t e x t of th e NT ca nn ot be

r e c o n s t r u c t e d a p a r t from an a c c u r a t e d e l i n e a t i o n of the h i s

t o r y o f i t s t r a n s m i s s i o n . P a t r i s t i c e v i d e n c e f i g u r e s promi

n e n t l y i n t h i s d e l i n e a t i o n and i s , i n some r e s p e c t s , more

i m p o r t a n t t o i t t h a n a r e t h e Greek MSS an d e a r l y v e r s i o n s .

See n. 23, p. 17 below, and the d i s c u s s i o n of pp. 22 -

29.2The h i s t o r i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e of the P a t r i s t i c e v i d e n c e

w as r e c o g n i z e d b y t h e e a r l i e s t p i o n e e r s o f t e x t u a l c r i t i c i s m ,e s p e c i a l l y b y t h e e i g h t e e n t h - c e n t u r y s a v a n t R i c h a r d B e n t l e y ,whose s t u d y o f Jerome an d O r i g e n d i c t a t e d the scope and methodo f h i s c r i t i c a l r e s e a r c h . Fo r contemporary a s s e s s m e n t s o f t h ev a l u e o f t h e P a t r i s t i c s o u r c e s , s e e e s p e c i a l l y Je an Dupla cya n d J a c k Suggs, " L e s c i t a t i o n s g r e q u e s e t l a c r i t i q u e d u t e x t ede Nouveau T e s t a m e n t : l e passé, l e p r e s e n t , e t l ' a v e n i r , " i nLe B i b l e e t l e s pères, e d s . André B e n o i t a n d P i e r r e P r i g e n t( P a r i s : P r e s s e s U n i v e r s i t a i r i e s de France, 1971) 187-213;

Gordon D. Fe e, "The T e x t of John i n t h e J e r u s a l e m B i b l e : AC r i t i q u e o f th e Use o f P a t r i s t i c C i t a t i o n s i n New Te st am en tT e x t u a l C r i t i c i s m , " J f i L 90 ( 1971 ) 163-73; Bruce M. Metzger" P a t r i s t i c E v i d e n c e a nd t h e T e x t u a l C r i t i c i s m o f t h e NewTe st am en t, " NTS 18 (1971-7 2) 379-400; M. J . Suggs, "The Use ofP a t r i s t i c E v i d e n c e i n t h e S e a r c h f o r a P r i m i t i v e New Te st am en tT e x t , " HIS 4 (195 7-5 8) 131-47. The a r t i c l e s by Fee and Metzger a r e d i r e c t e d , i n l a r g e measure, a g a i n s t t h e o v e r l yz e a l o u s a p p r o p r i a t i o n o f P a t r i s t i c e v i d e n c e by M.-E. Boi sm ar d,whose vi ew s and r e s u l t a n t r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e Greek t e x t o fth e Gos pel of John were t a k e n o v e r b y D. M o l l a t f o r h i st r a n s l a t i o n i n t h e J e r u s a l e m B i b l e . B o i s m a r d d e v e l o p e d h i s

p o s i t i o n i n t h e f o l l o w i n g a r t i c l e s : "A propos de J e a n v, 39,"BJ 55 (1948) 5-34; " C r i t i q u e textuellä e t c i t a t i o n s p a t r i s -t i q u e s , " RB 57 ( 19 50 ) 388-408; " L e c t i o r b r e v i o r , p o t i o r , " KB58 (1951) 161-68; "Dans l e s e i n d e s Père (J o 1, 18 ), " RB 59(1952) 23-39; "Problèmes de c r i t i q u e t e x t u e l l e c o n c e r n a n t l e

4


17/304

M e t h o d o l o g i c a l Problems /5

U n l i k e t h e s e o t h e r k i n d s o f e v i d e n c e . P a t r i s t i c B o u r c e s can

be d a t e d and l o c a l i z e d w i t h r e l a t i v e p r e c i s i o n . S i n c e t he

t r a n s m i s s i o n h i s t o r y o f t h e NT cannot be r e c o n s t r u c t e d w i t h

out knowing when and where c o r r u p t i o n e n t e r e d t h e t e x t u a l

t r a d i t i o n , t h i s k i n d of p r e c i s i o n i s a s i n e gu_a. non f o r t h e

e n t i r e c r i t i c a l p r o c e s s .

D e s p i t e t h i s r e l a t i v e advantage. P a t r i s t i c s o u r c e s have

r e c e i v e d f a r l e s s c r i t i c a l a t t e n t i o n t ha n have t h e Greek and

v e r s i o n a l e v i d e n c e . No doubt t h i s s c h o l a r l y r e t i c e n c e de

r i v e s , i n l a r g e measure, from c o m p l e x i t i e s unique t o t h e

e v i d e n c e , c o m p l e x i t i e s stemming both from t h e l o o s e c i t a t i o n

h a b i t s of th e F a t h e r s and from th e f a u l t y t r a n s m i s s i o n o ft h e i r w r i t i n g s . I t i s w e l l known t h a t t h e F a t h e r s did not

a l w a y s make a c o n s c i e n t i o u s e f f o r t t o c i t e B i b l i c a l t e x t s

a c c u r a t e l y , w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n of l e n g t h y c i t a t i o n s , quota

t i o n s were n o r m a l l y drawn from memory w i t ho u t c o n s u l t i n g a

B i b l i c a l m a n u s c r i p t . The r e s u l t a n t " l o o s e " c i t a t i o n s range

from p a r a p h r a s e s of B i b l i c a l a c c o u n t s , t o a d a p t a t i o n s o f t e x t s

to t h e i r s y n t a c t i c a l o r m a t e r i a l c o n t e x t , t o c o m p l i c a t e d con

f l a t i o n s of s e v e r a l p a s s a g e s i n t o one. To make m a t t e r s worse,t h e F a t h e r s r a r e l y noted t h e s o u r c e s of t h e i r c i t a t i o n s . Thus

t h e "words of th e S a v i o r , " or the "Holy A p o s t l e , " o r t h e

" b l e s s e d P e t e r " ca n be quoted w i t h o ut r e f e r e n c e t o any of t h e

books o f t h e NT. And f r e q u e n t l y a NT q u o t a t i o n i s i n t r o d u c e d

o n l y by a s t a n d a r d q u o t a t i o n f o r m ul a , s u c h a s Teypantat .

C o n s e q u e n t l y , i t o f t e n p r o v e s d i f f i c u l t n o t o n l y t o a s c e r t a i n

quatrième évangiïëT" RB 60 (1953) 347-71; "Le papyrusBodmer I I , " ES 64 (1957) 363-98. Boismard's v i e w s l e a d t o th ea c c e p t a n c e of th e " s h o r t e r t e x t " of John a t v i r t u a l l y every p o i n t , even where th e P a t r i s t i c s o u r c e s s t a n d a l o n e i n t h e i ra t t e s t a t i o n of t h i s t e x t . As w i l l be s e e n below, t h e p r e s e n tw r i t e r c o n c u r s t h a t Boismard's p o s i t i o n i s u n t e n a b l e . TheP a t r i s t i c s o u r c e s p r o v i d e p r i m a r y e v i d e n c e f o r t h e h i s t o r y o ft h e t r a n s m i s s i o n o f t h e NT t e x t b u t only seconda ry evi den cef o r t he o r i g i n a l t e x t i t s e l f .

3 s e e B r u c e M. Metzger, The T e x t o f t h e New Testament: I t sT r a n s m i s s i o n , C o r r u p t i o n , and R e s t o r a t i o n . 2nd ed. (New York:

Oxford U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1968) 86.* T h i s a l o n e a c c o u n t s f o r t h e u b i q u i t y of " l o o s e " c i t a

t i o n s i n t h e P a t r i s t i c s o u r c e s , s e e Fe e, "The T e x t o f John i nt h e J e r u s a l e m B i b l e , " 167-70; Metzger, T e x t . 87-88.


18/304

6/ Didymus and t he Gospel

t h e p r e c i s e wording of a Father's B i b l i c a l t ex t, but al so to

determine t he s o u r c e of a q u o t a t i o n . Th e l a t t e r problem i s

e s p e c i a l l y a c u t e , of c o u r s e , i n q u o t a t i o n s from t h e S y n o p t i cG o s p e l s .

The o t h e r set of problems unique t o P a t r i s t i c s o u r c e s

c o n c e r n s t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e i r own t r a n s m i s s i o n . Th e MS t r a d i

t i o n s o f v i r t u a l l y a l l t he c h u r c h F a t h e r s show t h a t l a t e r

c o p y i s t s tended to " c o r r e c t " q u o t a t i o n s of the Bi b l e to the

form of t ex t pr ev al en t in t h e i r own day. Consequently, P a t r i s

t i c w r i t i n g s t h a t s u r v i v e o n l y i n Medieval MSS or t h a t a r e

a v a i l a b l e o n l y i n u n c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n s , s u c h a s Migne's

P a t r o l o q i a G r a e c a , a r e of p r a c t i c a l l y no v a l u e f o r e s t a b -5

l i s h i n g th e o r i g i n a l wording of the NT. B i b l i c a l c i t a t i o n si n s u c h s o u r c e s do not n e c e s s a r i l y re pr es en t t he te xt of the

6

Father, but often o n l y t h a t known t o h i s l a t e r c o p y i s t s .

I t has become w i d e l y r e c o g n i z e d i n r e c e n t y e a r s t h a t

t h e s e c o m p l e x i t i e s r e q u i r e t h e c r i t i c to follow s t r i c t method

o l o g i c a l p r i n c i p l e s when a s s e s s i n g t h e P a t r i s t i c e v i d e n c e .

These p r i n c i p l e s i n v o l v e t h r e e a s p e c t s o f t h e a n a l y s i s : ( 1)

Only c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n s o f a F a t h e r ' s works can be used; (2)

Only t h o s e NT q u o t a t i o n s and a l l u s i o n s whose B i b l i c a l s o u r c e s

a r e beyond doubt can be c o n s i d e r e d ; and (3) A l l of th e d a t a —

This has been acknowledged at l e a s t s in c e the turn oft he c e n t u r y . See Fr e de r ic C. Kenyon, Handbook to the, Xe.xtualC r i t i c i s m of the New Testament (London: Macmillan & Co., 1901)206. The fo ll ow in g i s a modern a s s e s s m e n t by Gordon Fee:"Over the pa st ei gh t ye ar s I have been c o l l e c t i n g t he Greek

p a t r i s t i c e v i d e n c e f o r Luke and John f o r t he I n t e r n a t i o n a lGreek New Testament P r o j e c t . I n a l l o f t h i s m a t e r i a l I havefound one i n v a r i a b l e : a good c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n o f a f a t h e r ' st e x t , or the di sc ov er y of e a r l y MSS, a l w a y s moves t h e f a t h e r ' st e x t of the NT away from the I B and c l o s e r to the te x t of our

modern c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n s . " (emphasis h i s ) Gordon D. Fe e,"Modern T e x t u a l C r i t i c i s m and t h e R e v i v a l o f t h e T e x t u s ESSSE^t u s . " JETS 21 (1978) 26-27.

6 Among th e p r e v i o u s P a t r i s t i c s t u i i e s whose f i n d i n g s a r ecompromised by th e us e of u n c r i t i c a l a d i t i o n s i s , s i g n i f i c a n t l y , t he d i s s e r t a t i o n o f Wilhelm C. L i n s s , "The Gospel T e x tof Didymus" ( B o s t o n U n i v e r s i t y , 1 9 5 5 ) . See n. 42, p. below.

7 I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e works c i t e d i n n. 2, p. 4, s ee GordonD. Fee, "The T e x t of John i n O r i g e n and C y r i l of Al ex an dr ia : AC o n t r i b u t i o n t o Methodology in the Recovery and A n a l y s i s ofP a t r i s t i c C i t a t i o n s , " B i b l i c a 52 (1971) 357-94.


19/304

M e t h o d o l o g i c a l Problems p

i . e . a l l s u r v i v i n g c i t a t i o n s , a d a p t a t i o n s , a nd even a l l u

s i o n s — m u s t b e a n a l y z e d ^ b e f o r e a t t e m p t i n g t o d e l i n e a t e t h e

F a t h e r ' s B i b l i c a l t e x t . Eac h of th es e a s p e c t s can now be

c o n s i d e r e d i n d i v i d u a l l y .

The Use of C r i t i c a l E d i t i o n s

T he c o n s t r u c t i o n o f c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n s o f t h e F a t h e r s '

w r i t i n g s o b v i o u s l y l i e s o u t s i d e t h e purview of NT t e x t u a l

c r i t i c i s m . T h i s means t h a t a c o r r e c t a n a l y s i s o f a F a t h e r ' s

t e x t p r e s u p p o s e s , i n some measure, t h e v a l i d i t y o f p r e v i o u s

e d i t o r i a l d e c i s i o n s . The c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n s o f Didymus's works

were somewhat e a s i e r t o produce tha n a re th os e of ch ur ch

F a t h e r s whose w r i t i n g s have s u r v i v e d i n numerous but l a t e MSS.

Each of Didymus's a u t h e n t i c w r i t i n g s i s p r e s e r v e d i n o n l y one,

r e l a t i v e l y e a r l y , MS which ap p e a r s t o r e p r e s e n t f a i t h f u l l y the9

o r i g i n a l t e x t . C o n s e q u e n t l y , making c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n s o f

t h e s e works i n v o l v e d p r i m a r i l y t h r e e t a s k s : ( 1) r e c o n s t r u c t i n g

t h e t e x t wherever lac una e occu r, (2) comparing the re ad in gs of

t h e o r i g i n a l hands of th e MSS wi th tho se of th e c o r r e c t o r s

10(which in some c a s e s numbered s i x o r more), and (3)

c o r r e c t i n g o b v i o u s t r a n s c r i p t i o n a l e r r o r s . By f a r th e most

f r e q u e n t e r r o r s a r e o r t h o g r a p h i c , problems of i t a c i s m o c c u r

r i n g o n n e a r l y e v e r y page.

T h e S o u r c e A n a l y s i s

The f i r s t s t e p toward a n a l y z i n g a F a t h e r ' s NT t e x t i n

v o l v e s a s c e r t a i n i n g t he B i b l i c a l s o u r c e f o r e a c h c i t a t i o n ,

a d a p t a t i o n , a n d a l l u s i o n . I n c e r t a i n k i n d s o f P a t r i s t i c

The terms " c i t a t i o n , " " a d a p t a t i o n , " an d " a l l u s i o n " w i l l be c a r e f u l l y d i f f e r e n t i a t e d on pp. 13-14 below. At t h i s p o i n ti t i s n e c e s s a r y o n l y t o note t h a t t h e f o l l o w i n g d i s c u s s i o nu s e s t h e term " q u o t a t i o n " when s p e a k i n g o f both c i t a t i o n s anda d a p t a t i o n s , w h i l e t h e term " r e f e r e n c e " i s u s ed t o i n d i c a t ean y o f t h e t h r e e k i n d s o f e v i d e n c e — c i t a t i o n , a d a p t a t i o n , o ra l l u s i o n .

9See the works c i t e d i n n. 54, p. 25 below.

1 0 A s i n t h e Z e c h a r i a h commentary. S e e L o u i s D o u t r e l e a u ,

Didvme l ' A v e u g l e s u r Z a c h a r i e ( P a r i s : L e s Éditions du Ce r f,(1962) 46-50.

^ L o c a t i n g a l l t h e p e r t i n e n t r e f e r e n c e s i s i t s e l f not ad i f f i c u l t m a t t e r , i n v o l v i n g s i m p l y t h e p e r f u n c t o r y t a s k o f


20/304


w r i t i n g s , o f c o u r s e , t h i s k i n d o f d e t e r m i n a t i o n c a n b e made

r e l a t i v e l y e a s i l y — f o r example i n a commentary on the B i b l i c a l

book i n q u e s t i o n . P a t r i s t i c commentaries o f t e n s u p p l y lemmata

b e f o r e t h e e x p o s i t i o n o f ea ch p a s s a g e . To be s u r e , t h e s e

lemmata sometimes r e p r e s e n t l a t e r a d d i t i o n s t o a F a t h e r ' s

works so t h a t th ey can be use d onl y as sec ond ary so ur ce s fo r

r e c o n s t r u c t i n g h i s B i b l i c a l t e x t . B u t u s u a l l y t h e F a t h e r

quotes the passage under c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n t he e x p o s i t i o n i t

s e l f , t h u s p r o v i d i n g t h e c r i t i c w i t h ample evi den ce fo r a

t e x t u a l r e c o n s t r u c t i o n .

With o t h e r g e n r e s o f P a t r i s t i c w r i t i n g s , t he c r i t i c i s

l e s s f o r t u n a t e . P a t r i s t i c sermons on B i b l i c a l themes, for

example, t e n d t o c o n t a i n b r i e f , s p o r a d i c r e f e r e n c e s t o t h e

NT. The s i t u a t i o n i s s i m i l a r i n commentaries on B i b l i c a l

books o t h e r t h a n t h o s e b e i n g s u b j e c t e d t o t e x t u a l a n a l y s i s .

Thus one f i n d s th a t in h i s OT commentaries, Didymus o f t e n

quotes h a l f a v e r s e from the NT here, h a l f a v e r se th er e, two

v e r s e s h e r e , t h r e e t h e r e . Normally he does n ot mention the

B i b l i c a l s o u r c e f o r t h e s e q u o t a t i o n s . T h i s o b v i o u s l y c o m p l i

c a t e s t h e e n t i r e t e x t - c r i t i c a l p r o c e s s , s i n c e a n a n a l y s i scannot proceed without f i r s t d e t e r m i n i n g t h e B i b l i c a l

r e f e r e n t s f o r Didymus's q u o t a t i o n s a nd a l l u s i o n s .

U n f o r t u n a t e l y , s e v e r a l p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s o f P a t r i s t i c

w i t n e s s e s f a i l e d t o d e a l a d e q u a t e l y w i t h t h e problem o f

s o u r c e s , l e a d i n g t o d i s t o r t e d p r e s e n t a t i o n s o f e v i d e n c e . An

d e t e r m i n i n g where a F a t h e r quotes or a l l u d e s to th e NT. N a t u r a l l y t h e s o u r c e a n a l y s i s , a s d e s c r i b e d below, w i l l e l i m

i n a t e some of the da ta t e n t a t i v e l y acc ep te d at the ou ts et oft h e a n a l y s i s .12

See Fee, "The Text of John i n Ori ge n and C y r i l , " 363-64.

13 Among t h e noteworthy s t u d i e s o f P a t r i s t i c s o u r c e s t h a t

p r e s e r v e o n l y i s o l a t e d NT quotations and a l l u s i o n s are thef o l l o w i n g : Lawrence E l d r i d g e , T he G o sp e l T e x t o f E p i p h a n l u so f S a l a m j s ( S a l t Lake C i t y : U n i v e r s i t y o f Utah P r e s s , 1 9 6 9 ) ,Gordon D. Fe e, "The T e x t of John and Mark i n t h e W r i t i n g s o fC h r y s o s t o a , " NJT£ 26 (1979-80) 525-47, A l e x a n d e r Globe, " S e r a -

p i o n o f Thmuis as Wi tne ss to the Gos pel Te xt Used by Or ig eni n C a e s a r e a , " NovT 26 ( 198 4) 97-127, M. Mees, D i e Z i t a t e ausdem Neuen Testament b e i Clemens v on A l e x a n d r i e n (Rome, 197 0) ,and C a r r o l l Osburn, "The Text of the Pauline E p i s t l e s i nK i p p o l y t u s o f Rome," Second Ce nt ur y 2 (1982) 97-124.


21/304

Methodological Problems /9

outstanding case i n p o i n t i s t h e landmark study^ of Chrysos-

tom's t e x t o f Mark by J . G e e r l i n g s and S. New. As Gordon

Fee h a s r e c e n t l y demonstrated, G e e r l i n g s an d New drew c o n c l u s i o n s about Chrysostom's t e x t o f Mark from q u o t a t i o n s found i n

15

p r e c i s e l y t h e same form i n other Gospe ls. But o b v i o u s l y a

study of Mark's t e x t cannot us e as data quotat ions which

might j u s t a s w e l l have come from Matthew. T h i s r a i s e s the

methodological problem o f how t o determine t h e B i b l i c a l

s o u r c e o f a P a t r i s t i c q u o t a t i o n o r a l l u s i o n .

Sometimes t h e determ inatio n proves t o be a r e l a t i v e l y

simple a f f a i r , a s when t h e author names h i s s o u r c e . Such a16

statement can normally, bu t not always, be t r u s t e d . More

f r e q u e n t l y s o u r c e s must be determined on t h e b a s i s of i n t e r

n a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , t h a t i s , on t h e ground of v e r b a l c o r r e s

pondence t o m a t e r i a l found i n only one Gospel o r another.

Problems of determining s ource s a r i s e i n t h r e e k i n d s of

c i r c u m s t a n c e s . The f i r s t ha s t o do wi th Gospel p a r a l l e l s —

when v e r b a l l y i d e n t i c a l passages occur i n more than oneGospel. The problem ca n be i l l u s t r a t e d from Didymus's

w r i t i n g s . I n h i s commentary on E c c l e s i a s t e s Didymus s t a t e s

φωνήν Βοώντος είναι έν τη έρημψ ( E c c l T 38:24) . T h i s

J a c o b G e e r l i n g s and S i l v a New, "Chrysostom's Text o fthe Gospel of Mark," HTR 24 (1931) 121-42.

15Fee, "The T e x t of John and Mark i n Chrysostom," 538-47.

1 6 A s t r i k i n g example of t h e problem o f a c c e p t i n g u n c r i

t i c a l l y an a u t h o r ' s d e c l a r a t i o n o f h i s s o u r c e ca n be found i nDidymus's commentary on Psalms. I n the fo ll ow in g passageDidymus p o i n t s out th e d i f f e r e n t r e n d e r i n g s o f a dominicals a y i n g by Matthew and Luke: τον αύτ&ν γαρ τόπον γράφοντες όμεν Λουκάς λέγει "δώσει άγαθο τοις αίτοΰοιν αυτόν," ό Μαθαϊος"δώοει ιτνεΰμα άγ ιο ν. " As t h e e d i t o r s o f t h e commentaryc o r r e c t l y n o t i c e d , t h e f i r s t c i t a t i o n a c t u a l l y d e r i v e s from

Matthew, and t h e second from Lukei Thus even when t h e authornames h i s source, t h e p r o c e s s of i n t e r n a l examinationo u t l i n e d bel ow must be followed.

17

The following s i g l a a r e used f o r Didymus's comment a r i e s throughout t h e pre sen t study. E c c l T = E c c l e s i a s t e scommentary of Toura; GenT»Genesis commentary; Job T=J obcommentary; PsT=Psalms commentary; ZeT=Zechariah commentary.Thus E c c l T 38:24 s i g n i f i e s t h e E c c l e s i a s t e s commentary ofToura, pag e 38, l i n e 24.


22/304

10/ Didymus and t h e Gospels

r e p r e s e n t s an a d a p t a t i o n of th e passage found i n p r e c i s e l y

the same form i n a l l f o u r G o s p e l s: φωνή βοώντος έν trj έρήμψ

(Matt 3:3; Mark 1:3; Luke 3:4; John 1 : 23 ) . O c c a s i o n a l l y th e

same problem a r i s e s when p r e c i s e v e r b a l p a r a l l e l s a r e found

w i t h i n t h e same Gospel, a s when Didymus s a y s ιασαν νόσον καί

μαλαχιαν θεραπεύοντος (ZeT 139:10), an a d a p t a t i o n of t h e

Matthean θεροπεϋων χάσαν νόσον και μαλαχίαν found i n bot h

Matt 4:23 and 9:34 or θεράπευε ι ν πασαν νόσον .τ.λ. found i n

Matt 10:1. S i n c e t h e s o u r c e s of the se quo tat ion s cannot be

deter mined , t hey canno t be used i n an a n a l y s i s o f Didymu s's

t e x t . T h i s means t h a t a l a r g e number of d a t a must be excluded

from t h e a n a l y s i s a t the outs et.

The second kind o f problem d e r i v e s from s c r i b a l harmoni

z a t i o n s o f one Gospel t o another i n t h e c o u r s e of t h e i r t r a n s

m i s s i o n . U s u a l l y each Gospel w i l l c o n t a i n some unique r e a d

i n g s i n p a r a l l e l passages: a d i f f e r e n t verb tense, t h e a d d i

t i o n o r o m i s s i o n of a word or phrase, t h e u s e o f a synonymn,

and t h e l i k e . I f a F a t h e r were to quote a passage i n one of

i t s d i s t i n c t i v e forms, h i s source woul d be e a s i l y recognized.But s i n c e many unique elements of th e Gospels were e l i m i n a t e d

by w e l l - i n t e n t i o n e d s c r i b e s who harmonized one passage t o

another, i t i s oft en impossi ble t o determine whether a Father

i s quoting one of t h e Gospels i n i t s ( o r i g i n a l l y ) unique form

or a d i f f e r e n t Gospel t h a t was l a t e r harmonized t o i t . The

nature of th e problem c a n a g a i n be i l l u s t r a t e d from Didymus's

w r i t i n g s . I n h i s commentary on t h e Psalms, Didymus c i t e s the

f o l l o w i n g s a y i n g o f J e s u s : ουκ έστιν ό 8εός νεχρών hk\a ζώντων

(PsT 276:2). The q u o t a t i o n conforms t o Matthew's v e r s i o n of

the log ion . Th is i s s i g n i f i c a n t because i t shows Didymus's

3

support f o r two v a r i a n t s i n t h e t r a d i t i o n : (1) 6 θεός w i t h UBS

Β L Λ fam 1 33 a g a i n s t θεός found i n χ D W an d ό θεδς θεός

found i n TR Ε (θ) Π a ( fam 13) 892 1 241, and (2 ) £στιν with

r e l l . a g a i n s t έοτιν δέ found i n fam 13 e. Bu t t h e r e a s o n s f or

c o n s i d e r i n g t h i s c i t a t i o n Matthean evaporate when t h e MS t r a

d i t i o n of Mark i s exam ined more c l o s e l y . To be s u r e , Mark's

v e r s i o n probably re ad ΟΌΗ δστιν 3εός .τ.λ. (thus B U L K

a l . ) . But th e d e f i n i t e a r t i c l e i s found i n numerous other


23/304

Methodological Problems / l l

w i t n e s s e s , i n c l u d i n g « A C θ 33. So h e r e i t i s impossible

to determine whether Didymus a g r e e s w i t h Β a g a i n s t κ i n a

Matthean c i t a t i o n o r w i t h Ν a g a i n s t Β i n a Marcan. F o r t h i sreason, whenever a passage of one Gospel ha s been harmonized

to that o f a n o t h e r i n a s i g n i f i c a n t s t r a n d of th e t e x t u a l t r a

d i t i o n , n e i t h e r passage ca n be used t o e s t a b l i s h a Father's

t e x t u a l a f f i n i t i e s .

A t h i r d p r o b l e m a t i c s i t u a t i o n o cc ur s when a Father,

e i t h e r by a c c i d e n t o r d e s ig n , c o n f l a t e s two or more B i b l i c a l

p a s s a g e s . O c c a s i o n a l l y a c o n f l a t e d r e a d i ng ca n be u n r a v e l l e d

so as t o make t h e c o n s t i t u e n t p a r t s and t h e i r s ou r c e s r e a d i l yd i s c e r n a b l e , Such i s t h e case, f o r example, when Didymus

s a y s πάς. . . ός έάν όμολογήση έν έμοί έμπροσθεν των ανθρώπων

. ,.Η&γω ομολογήσω αυτόν (P sT 210:34-45). The f i r s t p a r t of

the quotation (πάς...ανθρώπων) must r e p r e s e n t a c i t a t i o n of

Luke 12:8, t h e second (κάγω...αυτόν) an a d a p t a t i o n of Ma tt

10:32. I n o t h e r p l a c e s , however, c o n f l a t i o n s a r e h o p e l e s s l y

complex, making t he d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f sour ces impo ssib le. Th is

i s t r u e , f o r example, i n th e foll owin g q uotation from EcclT

358:26-359:2: t i ' v i ομοιώσω την γενεαν ταύτην;...όμοια έστιν

ίαιόι'οις έν αγορά χαθημένοις, α προσφωνεί έτερα προς έτερα

λέγοντες ηύλη'σαμεν ύμίν Mai ούκ ώρχησασ9ε, έθρηνήσαμεν ύμϊν

won. ούκ έκόψασθε. . .ήλθεν "Ιωάννης μήτε έσθιων μήτε πίνων.

C l e a r l y p a r t o f t h i s t e x t d e r i v e s from Matt 11:16.-18 and part

from Luke 7:31-32. But t h e two a c c o u n t s ar e so i n t r i c a t e l y

i n t e r w o v e n t h a t t h e s o u r c e of each p h r a s e cannot be discerned.

And p a r t of th e t e x t a g r e e s w i t h n e i t h e r G o s p e l , d e r i v i n g from

Didymus's own fr ee handling of th e m a t e r i a l s . O b v i o u s l y com

p l e x c o n f l a t i o n s o f t h i s s o r t cannot be used when seeking t o

e s t a b l i s h a F a t h e r ' s t e x t u a l a f f i n i t i e s .

A s o u r c e a n a l y s i s , then, s e r v e s t o l i m i t t h e s t u d y of

P a t r i s t i c quotations and a l l u s i o n s t o t h o s e t h a t a r e not found

i n i d e n t i c a l form e i t h e r i n t h e o r i g i n a l t e x t s of th e Gospels

or i n t h e i r MS t r a d i t i o n s , and t o t h o s e t h a t a r e n o t c o n f l a t e d

beyond t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of d i s e n t a n g l e m e n t .


24/304


T h e T e x t u a l R e c o n s t r u c t i o n

The t h i r d ar ea of me tho dol ogi cal con cern has to do w it h

t h e a c t u a l r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e F a t h e r ' s B i b l i c a l t e x t . Herea g a i n some g e n r e s o f l i t e r a t u r e w i l l be more amenable t o t he

t a s k t h an o t h e r s . B i b l i c a l commentaries on th e pa ss ag es i n

q u e s t i o n w i l l t e n d t o p r e s e r v e a r e l a t i v e l y h i g h degree o f

a c c u r a c y o f c i t a t i o n — i f n ot i n th e lemmata, a t l e a s t i n th e18

e x p o s i t i o n i t s e l f . I n c o n t r a s t , q u o t a t i o n s i n commentaries

o n o t h e r p a s s a g e s w i l l o f t e n b e a l l u s i v e and more f r e q u e n t l y

adapted t o t h e g r a m m a t i c a l o r m a t e r i a l c o n t e x t . T he f o l l o w i n g

m e t h o d o l o g i c a l p r o p o s a l s were developed i n view o f t h i s l a t t e r

k i n d o f e v i d e n c e , g i v e n t h e f r e q u e n t b u t s p o r a d i c q u o t a t i o n s

of th e NT i n Didymus's e x p o s i t o r y works.

The f i r s t s t e p toward r e c o n s t r u c t i n g a F a t h e r ' s B i b l i c a l

t e x t e n t a i l s d e t e r m i n i n g t h e r e l a t i v e v a l u e of a l l t h e d a t a

t h u s f a r c o l l e c t e d . T h i s d e t e r m i n a t i o n i n v o l v e s c l a s s i f y i n g

e a c h B i b l i c a l q u o t a t i o n a n d a l l u s i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o i t s

v e r b a l cor resp ond enc e to the NT so ur ce . At t h i s p o i n t t h e r e

e n t e r s i n t o t h e c r i t i c a l p r o c e s s t h e s u b j e c t i v e judgment o fwhether t h e P a t r i s t i c a u t h o r i n t e n d e d t o c i t e t h e t e x t p r e

c i s e l y o r w i l l i n g l y a l t e r e d o r p a r a p h r a s e d t h e t e x t . I n

t h e o r y , on e c o u l d a n a l y z e t h e manner o f c i t a t i o n so as to make

t h i s judgment. I f , f o r example, t h e a u t h o r i n t r o d u c e s t h e

r e f e r e n c e by c i t i n g h i s sou rce and us in g a c i t a t i o n formula

(e.g. Y^-ypau xai), one co ul d c l a s s i f y t h e r e f e r e n c e a s a n

i n t e n t i o n a l c i t a t i o n and, s ho ul d th e pa ss ag e be s u f f i c i e n t l y

l e n g t h y , a s s e r t t h a t i t d e r i v e s from

t h e a u t h o r ' s B i b l i c a l

MS.I n a c t u a l i t y , however, s u c h i n d i c a t o r s o f a u t h o r i a l i n t e n t

r a r e l y prove r e l i a b l e . C i t a t i o n formul ae can j u s t a s e a s i l y

p r e c e d e p a r a p h r a s e s a s c i t a t i o n s , a nd , a s p r e v i o u s l y s e e n , t h e

n o t a t i o n o f s o u r c e s i s sometimes e r r o n e o u s , making t h e i r v a l u e19

i n t h i s r e g a r d dubious. F o r t h e s e r e a s o n s , c l a s s i f i c a t i o n

o f B i b l i c a l r e f e r e n c e s i s b e t t e r made p u r e l y on t h e ground o f

v e r b a l c o r r e s p o n d e n c e t o t h e B i b l i c a l t e x t .

I n one se ns e t h i s approach a p p e a r s p r o b l e m a t i c , s i n c eIB

See the di s c u s s i o n on p. 7-8 above.19

See n. 16, p. 9 above.


25/304


c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s depend on t h e p r o x i m i t y o f e a c h r e f e r e n c e t o

t h e B i b l i c a l t e x t , w h i l e t h e physiognomy o f a F a t h e r ' s t e x t

cannot be determined w i t h o u t f i r s t e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e a c c u r a c yo f h i s r e f e r e n c e s t o i t . I n p r a c t i c e , however, i t i s n o t

d i f f i c u l t t o d i s t i n g u i s h between a f a i n t a l l u s i o n and a pre

c i s e c i t a t i o n . The r e a l d i f f i c u l t y comes i n d i s t i n g u i s h i n g ,

say, an i n t e n t i o n a l c i t a t i o n , which c o n t a i n s on e o r more s m a l l

v a r i a t i o n s from t h e F a t h e r ' s t e x t , from a s l i g h t a d a p t a t i o n o f

t h e t e x t made i n view of the s y n t a c t i c a l o r m a t e r i a l c o n t e x t .

I t must b e r e c o g n i z e d a t t h i s s t ag e t h a t a l l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s

a r e n e c e s s a r i l y p r o v i s i o n a l a nd s h o u l d b e viewed a s r e l a t i v e

p o i n t s o f r e f e r e n c e a l o n g a continuum r a n g i n g from e x a c t

c i t a t i o n t o d i s t a n t a l l u s i o n . No advances i n method can

overcome the short comi ngs of the P a t r i s t i c d a t a a t t h i s p o i n t ,

on oc ca si on i t may sim ply be th a t what l o o k s l i k e an ad apta

t i o n o f a B i b l i c a l t e x t a c t u a l l y d e r i v e d from t h e t e x t of the

F a t h e r ' s exemplar. On th e ot he r hand, s i n c e remnants of su ch

a n a b e r r a n t t e x t would presumably r e c u r e l s e w h e r e i n t h e

t e x t u a l t r a d i t i o n , i t i s r e l a t i v e l y s a f e t o assume t h a t t h e s e

e x c e p t i o n s w i l l be so r a r e as to make v i r t u a l l y no im pa ct on

t h e a n a l y s i s .

As a l r e a d y noted, t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y i s a d o p t i n g , w i t h

minor m o d i f i c a t i o n s , t h e t h r e e f o l d s y st e m o f c l a s s i f i c a t i o n

advocated by Gordon F e e : c i t a t i o n s , a d a p t a t i o n s , a n d a l l u -20

s i o n s . " C i t a t i o n s " c o n s i s t o f a c c u r a t e q u o t a t i o n s o f

t h e B i b l i c a l p a s s a g e . A c c u r a c y h e r e i s determined s o l e l y on

t h e ground o f v e r b a l c o n f o r m i t y t o t h e B i b l i c a l pas sag e, a sfound i n t h e v a r i o u s s t r a n d s o f t h e t r a d i t i o n . Thus i f t h e

c i t a t i o n v a r i e s markedly from t h e t e x t no rm al ly judge d to be

o r i g i n a l , y e t conforms w i t h t h e t e x t a s found i n a s i g n i f i c a n t

element of the t r a d i t i o n , i t w i l l s t i l l be c o n s i d e r e d a c i t a

t i o n . N a t u r a l l y , s i n c e minor changes may oc cu r, not ev er y

c i t a t i o n w i l l b e e q u a l l y p r e c i s e . N e v e r t h e l e s s , r a t h e r t h a n

overcrowding the system beyond t h e p o i n t of u s e f u l n e s s — i . e .

by l a b e l i n g c i t a t i o n s " v e r y l o o s e , " " l o o s e , " and " e x a c t " — a l l

2 0See e s p e c i a l l y "The Te xt of John i n t h e J e r u s a l e m

B i b l e , " 169-70.


26/304


more o r l e s s a c c u r a t e q u o t a t i o n s w i l l be r e g i s t e r e d a s c i t a

t i o n s .

" A d a p t a t i o n s " a r e B i b l i c a l r e f e r e n c e s which have beens i g n i f i c a n t l y mo dif ied f o r one rea son or anoth er. Some c r i t i c s

a p p l y t h i s c a t e g o r y o n l y t o q u o t a t i o n s changed i n c o n f o r m i t y

wi th th e grammat ical co nt ex t o j i n con for mit y wit h the poi nt

b e i n g made i n t h e d i s c u s s i o n . B ut t h i s approach t o c l a s s i

f i c a t i o n u n n e c e s s a r i l y r e s t r i c t s t h e c a t e g o r y t o v a r i a t i o n s

whose c a u s e s a r e r e a d i l y d i s c e r n e d . I n p o i n t o f f a c t , one

would e x p e c t t h a t a F a t h e r q u o t i n g from memory would o c c a s i o n

a l l y adapt a B i b l i c a l t e x t t o s u i t h i s own pur pos es, whether

or not these purposes a r e t r a n s p a r e n t . F o r t h i s r e a s o n , i t i s

b e t t e r t o c o n s i d e r a ny major m o d i f i c a t i o n o f a B i b l i c a l p a s

sage an a d a p t a t i o n , s o l o n g a s t h e r e f e r e n c e m a i n t a i n s a c l o s e

v e r b a l corre spond ence to the B i b l i c a l t e x t . T h i s broadening

o f t h e c a t e g o r y does not r e l i e v e t h e c r i t i c of th e t a s k of

f i n d i n g c o n t e x t u a l r e a s o n s f o r a d a p t a t i o n s ; i t does a l l o w t h e

c l a s s i f i c a t i o n t o b e a p p l i e d t o m o d i f i c a t i o n s made for no

o b v i o u s r e a s o n .

F i n a l l y , " a l l u s i o n s " c o n s i s t of S c r i p t u r a l r e m i n i s c e n c e s

t h a t have only a d i s t a n t v e r b a l c o r r e s p o n d e n c e t o t h e t e x t .

R e f e r e n c e s w i t h a b s o l u t e l y no v e r b a l c o r r e s po n d e n c e , o f

c o u r s e , c a n n o t h e l p t h e c r i t i c determine t h e words of th e

F a t h e r ' s t e x t and so can no t be use d i n th e a n a l y s i s .

When a p p r o p r i a t e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s have been made, the

P a t r i s t i c r e f e r e n c e s c a n be a n a l y z e d f o r t h e i r wit ne ss to the

t e x t of the NT. Here too a number o f p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s have

f a l l e n s h o r t b y f a i l i n g t o t a k e i n t o a c c o u n t a l l o f t h e e v i

dence. R i g h t l y r e c o g n i z i n g , f o r example, t h a t B i b l i c a l a l l u

s i o n s do not q u a l i f y a s c i t a t i o n s , many e a r l i e r c r i t i c s wrong

l y d i s c o u n t e d t h e t e x t - c r i t i c a l v a l u e o f a l l u s i o n s a l t o g e -22

t h e r . But even when r e f e r e n c e s t o t he B i b l i c a l t e x t l a c k

I b i d . , 170.22

T h i s was anot he r sho rtc omi ng of G e e r l i n g s and New, asshown by G. Fe e, "The T e x t of John and Mark i n Chrysostom,"538. Other s t u d i e s , such as L i n s s ' s on Didymus, g i v e c i t a t i o n s i n f u l l , but only l i s t S c r i p t u r a l r e f e r e n c e s o f a l l u s i o n s . C o l l a t i o n s a r e t h e n made onl y of the ex ac t quota-


27/304

Methodological Problems /15

t h e p r e c i s i o n of c i t a t i o n s (or of lo os e ad ap ta ti on s) they can

s t i l l , on oc ca si on , se rv e to i n d i c a t e which of s e v e r a l v a r i

ants was found i n t h e F a t h e r ' s t e x t . T h i s can be shown by an

example drawn from the present study of Didymus. I n a c l e a r

a l l u s i o n , t o Mt. 21:2, 4, Didymus writes έπι Βε(3ηχ


28/304

16/ Didymus and t h e Gospels

c h a r a c t e r and t h e u l t i m a t e p o t e n t i a l o f t e x t u a l r e c o n s t r u c

t i o n s ca n be i l l u s t r a t e d , once again, from t h e d a t a s e t fo rt h

i n t h e f o l l o w i n g c r i t i c a l apparatus. Didymus p r e s e r v e s two

a d a p t a t i o n s and one a l l u s i o n to Matt 5 : 4 5 —

(a) ανατέλλει γαρ τον ήλιον ώσπερ έπι αγαθούς (PsT

177:20);

(b) τόν ανατέλλοντα τον ή'λιον έπι άγαδους και πονηρούς

κα\ βρέχοντα έπ\ δίκαιους π α \ άδικους ( ZeT 246:11-12);

(c) ανατέλλων ού μόνον έπι άγαθοΰς τον ή'λιον άλλα και

έπ\ πονηρούς (PsT 290:21- 22).

On the b a s i s o f t h e s e r e f e r e n c e s , Didymus's t e x t ca n be recon

s t r u c t e d a s f o l l o w s :

ανατέλλει τον ήλιον έπι αγαθούς και πονηρούς και Βρέχει

έιι δίκαιους καϊ άδικους.

Here i t c a n b e seen t h a t Didymus p r e s e r v e s t h e word order

of t h e o l d L a t i n MS a (αγαθούς και πονηρούς). T h i s may not be

c o n s i d e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t , g i v e n t h e problem o f word order i n th e

v e r s i o n a l evidence. But i t i s worth n o t i n g t h a t Didymus also

r e a d s και βρέχει...άδικους w i t h th e whole t r a d i t i o n a g a i n s t

K , which omits i t . I n a ca se such a s t h i s , t h e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n must be made c o n s e r v a t i v e l y , changing word order o r makin g

a d d i t i o n s , s u b t r a c t i o n s , or s u b s t i t u t i on s o n l y on the b a s i s of

hard evidence. As a r e s u l t , t h e r e c o n s t r u c t e d t e x t may

p r e s e r v e some s i n g u l a r r e a d i n g s , as happens t w i c e i n th e

r e f e r e n c e j u s t c i t e d (ανατέλλει τον ή'λιον] ή'λιον ανατέλ λει;

ή'λιον ] ή'λιον αύτοϋ) . I n view of th e c h a r a c t e r of th e e v i

dence, no c o n f i d e n c e ca n be p l a c e d i n having uncovered some

r e a l s i n g u l a r r e a d i n g s by t h i s r e c o n s t r u c t i o n . I t c o u l d well

be t h a t Didymus simply misquoted o r adapted t h e t e x t c o n s i s

t e n t l y . But before even t h i s c o n c l u s i o n c a n be drawn, t h e

data must a t l e a s t be p r e s e n t e d . I n t h i s case such a p r e s e n t

a t i o n i s most adequately achie ved through a r e c o n s t r u c t i o n .

O c c a s i o n a l l y a r e c o n s t r u c t i o n can be attempted when a

s o l i t a r y a d a p t a t i o n e x i s t s , so long as th e changes a r e predo

m i n a n t ly s y n t a c t i c a l . Her e a r e c o n s t r u c t i o n e n t a i l s l i t t l e

more than t h e r e v e r s i o n to th e passage's o r i g i n a l syntax.

Thus, f o r examp le, Didymus p r e s e r v e s o n l y one, f a i r l y e x t e n -


29/304

M etho dolo gica l Problems /17

s i v e , a d a p t a t i o n o f Matt 22:13:

ώς και έν εύαγγελίψ περί τοΰ δέθεντος HOOLV καΐ χέρσιν

και Ρλήθεντος εις τδ οκότος τδ εξώτερον το ήτοιμασμένον

τφ όιαβόλω και τοις άγγέλοις αύτοΰ, εκεί έσται όκλαυθμδς και

ό βρυγμδς των οδόντων(PsT 247:7-8).

A r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of Didymus's t e x t can be made w i t h a f a i r

degree o f confidence.

δήσαντες αύτοΰ κόδας και χεύρας βάλετε (αύτοΰ) εις τδ οκότος

τδ εξώτερον, έκεϊ ίσται ό κλαυθμός η α ϊ ό βρυγμδς των οδόντων

The r e c o n s t r u c t i o n shows t h a t Didymus s u p p o r t s two s i g n i f i

c a n t v a r i a n t s of th e t e x t u a l t r a d i t i o n : ( l ) δή"σαντες αύτοΰ1. 13

πόδας και χείρας w i t h κ Β L θ f 892 a g a i n s t both

#ρατε αυτόν πόδων και χειρών found i n D a b e, and δησαντες

αύτοΰ πόδας και χείρας άρατε αύτδν και supported by t h e

b u l k of l a t e r MSS as w e l l a s by C 33 and 1241; and (2 )

βάλετε w i t h D f 1 3 1241 a b e a g a i n s t most o t h e r MSS.

The S p e c i a l S i g n i f i c a n c e and P e c u l i a r Problems o f Didymus a s

a Te xt ua l Wit ness

There ca n be no doubt about t h e t e x t - c r i t i c a l s i g n i f i

cance of th e Gospel quot ati ons o f Didymus, t h e b l i n d monk

appointed head of th e A l e x a n d r i a n c a t e c h e t i c a l s c h o o l by Atha-

n a s i u s . Didymus's l i f e spanned t h e f o u r t h c e n t u r y (A.D.

313-398). Born and r a i s e d i n A l e x a n d r i a , he ap pa re nt ly never

l e f t h i s home c i t y even a s an a d u l t . At an e a r l y age, perhaps

four o r f i v e , Didymus became b l i n d , probably t h e r e s u l t o f a

Didymus's l i f e , work, and t e a c h i n g s have been t h e subj e c t of t h r e e monographs i n modern t i m e s : G. Bardy, Didyme1'Aveuqle ( P a r i s : Beauchesne, 1910); J . L e i p o l d t , Didvmus de rB l i n d e von A l e x a n d r i a ( L e i p z i g : J . C. H i n r i c h s , 1 9 05 ); and

W i l l i a m J . Gauche, Didvmus t h e B l i n d : An E d u c a t o r of t h eFourth Century (Washington: C a t h o l i c U n i v e r s i t y of America,1934). Other h e l p f u l s k e t c h e s i n c l u d e Wolfgang A. B i e n e r t ," A l l e g o r i a " und "Anagoge" B e i Didvmos dem B l i n d e n von Alexand r i e n ( B e r l i n : Walter de G r u y t e r , 1972) 1-31; Lo ui s Doutre-leau, Sur Z a c h a r i e 1-128; Bärbel Kramer, "Didymus von A l e x a n d r i e n , " T h e o l o g i s c h e Realenzyklopädie, v o l . V I I I ( B e r l i n :

W a l t e r de G r u y t e r , 1981) 741-46; Johannes Quasten, P a t r o l o g y .v o l . I I I ( U t r e c h t : Spectrum, 1966) 85-100; and F r a n c e s Young,From Micaea t o C h a l c e d o n : ft Guide t o t h e L i t e r a t u r e and I t sBackground ( P h i l a d e l p h i a : F o r t r e s s P r e s s , 1983) 83-91.


30/304

18/ Didymus and th e G os pe ls

24c h i l d h o o d d i s e a s e . D e s p i t e t h i s s e t b a c k , h e d i s p l a y e d a

g r e a t f a c i l i t y f o r l e a r n i n g , and l a t e r i n l i f e a c q u i r e d a25

r e p u t a t i o n f o r a p r o d i g i o u s memory. H i s e d u c a t i o n c o v e r e da l l t h e major d i s c i p l i n e s of the day: mathematics, geometry,

2 6

astronomy, grammar, r h e t o r i c , d i a l e c t i c , a nd p h i l o s o p h y .

B e s t known f o r h i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f S c r i p t u r e , Didymus e s t a b

l i s h e d h i m s e l f e a r l y i n l i f e a s a prominent t e a c h e r i n A l e x a n

d r i a . I t w as i n t h e m i d s t o f t h e A r i a n c o n t r o v e r s y t h a t Atha-

n a s i u s app oi nte d him to be head of the famed c a t h e c h e t i c a l

s c h o o l , which by t h i s time had l o s t much of the spl en do r and

28r e p u t a t i o n i t h ad e a r l i e r e n j o y e d under Clement and Or ige n.

There i s no evi de nc e t h a t Didymus p u b l i c l y l e c t u r e d t o f u l f i l l

t h e d u t i e s o f h i s p o s t . More l i k e l y he taught from t h e p r i v a

cy of h i s own monk's c e l l . N e v e r t h e l e s s , h i s r e p u t a t i o n

spr ead f a r and wide: by l i f e ' s end he could number among h i s29

s t u d e n t s s u c h n o t e w o r t h i e s a s Jerome and Rufmus.

D u r i n g t h e c o u r s e of h i s c a r e e r Didymus d i c t a t e d numerous

t h e o l o g i c a l t r e a t i s e s and B i b l i c a l commentaries. Most s i g n i

f i c a n t f o r t h e c o n t r o v e r s i e s o f h i s own d ay were h i s d o c t r i n a l2 4 P a l l a d i u s , H i s t . L a u s . I V ; Jerome C h r o n i c o n . V I I I ;S o c r a t e s , H i s t . E c c l • . I V , 2 5; C a s s i o d o r u s , H i s t o r l a T r i p a r -tiâ, V I I I , 8.

25S e e , e .g ., S o c r a t e s , H i s t . E c c l . . I V, 25; Ruf in us ,

H i s t . E s s i . , I I , 7; Jerome, V i r . 111.. 109 and E p i s t . 50, adDomnionem.

2 6 R u f i n u s , H i st . E c c l •, I I , 7; S o c r a t e s , Hj,s,fc. £££l., IV,25-26; T h e o d o r e t , H j s t . E c c l . . IV, 26.

27

The da te of h i s appointment h a s been w i d e l y debated.Proposed d a t e s range from A.D. 335, be fo re At ha na si us 's f i r s te x i l e (T . de Régnon, Etudes de Théologie P o s i t i v e s u r l aS a i n t e Trinité, v o l . I I I [ P a r i s , 1 898] 19, ba se d on th e t e s t i

mony o f R u f i n u s , H i s t . E c c l . , I I , 7) to A.D. 371 ( C a r l Andre-s e n , "Didymos 3, " i n L e x i k o n d e r A l t e n Welt [ Z u r i c k : A r t e m i s

V e r l a g , 1 9 65 ] 7 3 2 - 3 3 ) . S e e t h e d i s c u s s i o n s o f Bardy, Dldvme.6 ; B i e n e r t , " A l l e g o r i a " , 5-6; Gauche, Eiâyjjms, 7 8; L e i p o l d t ,

28 /See esp. G. Bardy, "Pour l ' h i s t o i r e de l'école d'Alex-

a n d r i a , " Vi v r e e t Pen ser 2 (1942) 80-109; Gauch, Didvmus. 36-70.

29See Jerome's E p i s t . 112, ad Au gu st in iu s, 4-6; E p i s t .

84, ad Pammachium e t Oceanun; R u f i n u s , Apology. I I , 12; H i s t .E S S l . , I I , 7.


31/304


30works on t h e T r i n i t y (De T r i n i t a t e ^ and t h e Holy S p i r i t (De

31S p i r i t u S a n c t o ) . At h e a r t , though, Didymus was a B i b l i c a l

s c h o l a r , h a vi n g d i c t a t e d commentaries on much of t h e Ol d32Testament and most of t h e New. I n a d d i t i o n , some of Didy-

mus's s t u d e n t s l a t e r p u b l i s h e d n o t e s t a k e n from h i s e x p o s i t o r y33

l e c t u r e s on y e t o t h e r B i b l i c a l books.

Didymus i s a n i m p o r t a n t w i t n e s s t o t h e NT t e x t p r e

c i s e l y because of h i s h i s t o r i c a l c o n t e x t . He s t u d i e d t h e NT

and quoted i t s t e x t i n A l e x a n d r i a when t h e g r e a t A l e x a n d r i a n34

u n c i a l s were b e i n g produced. An a u r a of mystery ha s alwayss u r r o u n d e d t h e A l e x a n d r i a n t e x t . Was an e c c l e s i a s t i c a l l y -

s a n c t i o n e d r e c e n s i o n made t h e r e ( i n th e 4t h c e n t u r y ? o r t h e35 , , ,

2 n d ? ) ? When and how e x t e n s i v e l y d i d a s t r a i n of th e Wes tern30

See t h e r e c e n t c r i t i c a l e d i t i o n s by Jürgen HönscheidDidymus d e r B l i n d e : De t r i n i t a t e , Buch I (Meisenheim am Glan:

V e r l a g e Anton H a i n , 1975 ) and I n g r i d S e i l e r , Didymus d erB l i n d e : De t r i n i t a t e . Buch I I , K a p i t e l 1-7 (Meisenheim amG l a n : V e r l a g Anton Hain , 19 75 ).

3 1 S e e L o u i s D o u t r e l e a u , "Étude d'une t r a d i t i o n manusc r i t e : Le 'De S p i r i t u S a n c t o ' de Didyme," i n KyriaKon: Es§&- s c h r i f t Johannes Quasten, ed. P a t r i c k G r a n f i e l d and J o s e f A.Jungmann, v o l . 1 (Münster: V e r l a g A s c h e n d o r f f , 1970) 352-89;and idem, "Le De S p i r i t u S a n c t o de Didyme e t s e s éditeurs,"RechSR 51 (1963) 383-406. The t e x t ca n be found i n Migne, PG39, 1031-86.

32D o u t r e l e a u g i v e s t h e f o l l o w i n g a s Didymus's commenta

r i e s , acknowledging t h a t " c e t t e l i s t e e s t s a n s doute incom plète": G e n e s i s , Exodus, L e v i t i c u s , Job, Psalms, Pro ver bs,E c c l e s i a s t e s , Song o f Songs, I s a i a h , F i n a l V i s i o n o f I s a i a h ,J e r e m i a h , D a n i e l , Hosea, Z e c h a r i a h ; Matthew, Luke, J c h n , A c t s ,

Romans, 1 an d 2 C o r i n t h i a n s , G a l a t i a n s , E p h e si a n s , Hebrews,C a t h o l i c e p i s t l e s , and R e v e l a t i o n . S u r Z a c h a r l e . I , 17-18;119-26.

33T h i s i s to be i n f e r r e d from t h e c h a r a c t e r of th e E c c l e

s i a s t e s and Psalms commentaries d i s c o v e r e d a t Toura, a s d i s c u s s e d below, pp. 26-27.

34See t h e d i s c u s s i o n o f c o d i c e s N and B i n Metzger, Text,

7-8; 42-48.35

T h i s view was p o p u l a r i z e d by Wilhelm B o u s s e t , l a r g e l yon t h e b a s i s o f h i s a n a l y s i s of th e A l e x a n d r i a n fragmentscommonly d e s i g n a t e d by t h e s i g l u m "T": " D i e R e c e n s i o n desH e s y c h i u s , " T e x t k r i t i s c h e Çtudien zum Neuen Testament ( L e i p z i g : J . C. H i n r i c h s , 1894) 74-110. B o u ss e t 's p o s i t i o n h as

been d i s c o u n t e d by a number o f s c h o l a r s , most r e c e n t l y byGordon D. F e e , "P75, P66, and O r i g e n : The Myth of E a r l yT e x t u a l R e c e n s i o n i n A l e x a n d r i a , " i n New Dimensions i n New


32/304

20/ Didymus and th e Go sp el s3 6

t e x t e n t e r t h e A l e x a n d r i a n t r a d i t i o n ? Were t h e r e two37

s t r e a m s o f t r a n s m i s s i o n t h e r e , one e a r l y and one l a t e ? Or38

were th er e two rough ly contemporaneous s t r e a m s ? Were e l e

ments o f a p r o t o - B y z a n t i n e t e x t found i n A l e x a n d r i a a l r e a d y by

t h e f o u r t h c e n t u r y ? D i d t h e C a e s a r e a n t e x t u l t i m a t e l y d e

r i v e from t h e r e ? S c h o l a r s have a d d r e s s e d many of t he se

i s s u e s by a n a l y z i n g t h e second- and t h i r d - c e n t u r y A l e x a n d r i a n

w i t n e s s e s , v i z . t h e e a r l i e s t p a p y r i , Clement, and Or ig en .

Testament Study, eds. Richard N. Longenecker and H e r r i l l C.Tenney (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1974) 19-45.

3 6 A s e a r l y as the t h i r d c e n t u r y , E g y p t i a n w i t n e s s e s s u c h

as P29, P38, P45, P48 p r e s e r v e elements of the Western t e x t .See Metzger, Te xt , 214. Gordon D. F ee ("Codex S i n a i t i c u s i nt h e Gospel o f John: A C o n t r i b u t i o n t o Methodology i n E s t a b l i s h i n g T e x t u a l R e l a t i o n s h i p s , " NTS 15 [1968-69] 23-44) showst h a t i n John 1:1-8:38 codex S i n a i t i c u s i s a l e a d i n g r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the Western t e x t .

37T h i s view was pop ul ar iz ed by Wes tco tt and Hor t's d i f

f e r e n t i a t i o n between t h e " A l e x a n d r i a n " an d " N e u t r a l " t e x t s(The New Testament i n t h e O r i g i n a l Greek. 2 [Cambridge:

Macmillan, 1881] 126-32, 1 6 4 - 72 ) . S e e a l s o t h e d i s c u s s i o n o fC a r l o M a r t i n i , " I s There a La te Al ex an dr ia n T ext of the

Go sp el s? " HIS 24 (1977-78) 285-96.38T h i s i s t h e p o s i t i o n advocated by M a r t i n i i n t h e a r t i

c l e c i t e d i n the pr ec ed in g note.39

See the l i s t of papyrus-supported B y z a n t i n e r e a d i n g s i nHar ry A. St u r z , The Byza nt in e Text-Tvpe and New TestamentT e x t u a l C r i t i c i s m , 3r d ed. ( La Mirada, C a l : B i o l a C o l l e g eBookstore, 1980) 107-222, an d t h e c o n c l u s i o n s drawn t h e r e .See a l s o C. C. T a r e l l i , "The Ch es te r Be at ty Papyrus and th e

Western a nd B y z a n t i n e T e x t s , " ZS& 41 (1940) 253-60, andGunther Zuntz, The Te xt of th e E p i s t l e s : A D i s q u i s i t i o n Upont h e Corpus Paulinum (London: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y , 1 95 3) 5 5.

4 0The o r i g i n of the Caesa rea n t e x t h a s sometimes been

t r a c e d back to the t e x t O r i g e n brought t o C a e s a r e a when he moved from A l e x a n d r i a . Thus Robert P. Bl ak e, Ki rs op p Lake,and S i l v a New, "The Ca es ar e an Te xt of Mark," HTg 21 (1928)207-404. See Bruce M. Metzger, "Ca esar ean Te xt of th e Gos

p e l s , " i n Cha pte rs i n the Hi s t o r y of New Testament T e x t u a lC r i t i c i s m ( L e i d e n : E . J . B r i l l , 1963) 47, 62-67.

41I n

(new testament and the greek fathers no. 1 ) bart d. ehrman-didymus the blind and the text of the...

Documents