a fragment of an early christian hymn (papyrus bodmer 12): some observations

A Fragment of an Early Christian Hymn (Papyrus Bodmer 12): some Observations1

by Thomas Scott Caulley

The text of Papyrus Bodmer 122 reads:

1 Ømn»sate tÕn patšra oƒ ¤gioi,

2 °sate tÍ mhtrˆ parqšnoi

3 Ømnoàmen, Øperuyoàmen, ¤gioi.

4 Øyèqhte, nÚmfai kaˆ numf…oi

5 Óti hÛrate tÕn numf…on Ømîn CristÒn.

6 e„j o"non p…ete, nÚmfai kaˆ numf…oi.

This six-line text contained in the Bodmer miscellaneous codex3 has been the subject of con sider able speculation about its origins and associations, as well as its theological “Tendenz”4. While scholars acknowledge that the text is too brief to allow for defi nitive conclusions, a few observations are possible from which we may make plausible if contingent deductions.

Since its discovery, scholars have assumed that this text is part of a hymn, a fragment of a larger work. Since O. Perler’s study the notion has held sway that this text is probably a fragment of a work written by Melito of Sardis, or at least was thought by the collector(s) of the Bodmer Codex to have been written by him. Not only so, but the presumed connection with Melito allowed Perler to emend the text of the fragment to a reading more in keeping with his view of the alleged historical and theological context5. However, in S.G. Hall’s edition of Melito, “On Pascha and Fragments,” this text, labeled “Fragment 17,” is described as follows:

1 A version of this paper was presented on 19 May, 2008, in the English-German Col-loquium in New Testament, Universität Tübingen.

2 M. Testuz, Fragment d’un Hymne Liturgique, Papyrus Bodmer X-XII, Geneve 1959.3 On the designation, “Bodmer miscellaneous codex” see below page 404f.4 For example, see O. Perler, Ein Hymnus zur Ostervigil von Meliton?, Par. 15, Fribourg

1960. Building to a large extent on the work of Perler (regarding Fragment 17) is A. Stewart-Sykes, The Lamb’s High Feast: Melito, Peri Pascha and the Quartodeciman Paschal Liturgy at Sardis, SVigChr 42, Leiden 1998. For a different view, see Melito of Sardis, On Pascha and Fragments, ed. by S.G. Hall, OECT, Oxford 1979.

5 Perler, Hymnus (see note 4), 9. See Perler’s reconstructed text, below: Appendix (ii).

ZAC, vol. 13, pp. 403-414 DOI 10.1515/ZAC.2009.28© Walter de Gruyter 2009

Aufsätze/Essays

Brought to you by | Brown University Rockefeller LibraryAuthenticated | 128.148.252.35

Download Date | 10/12/13 9:40 PM

404 Thomas Scott Caulley

Fragment 17 is associated with Melito only by the fact that it follows (Peri Pascha) in the same Bodmer Papyrus Codex […]. It is included here because Perler has argued that it is a liturgical fragment deriving from the Quartodeciman liturgy which followed PP, and perhaps itself composed by Melito6.

Following Perler, A. Stewart-Sykes identifi ed this fragment as a remnant of the lost second book of Melito’s Peri Pascha attested by Eusebius (Histo-ria ecclesiastica IV 26,2). Stewart-Sykes concludes: “If Eusebius’ witness concerning Peri Pascha in two books is to be upheld then the only remain-ing possibility is the theory of Perler that the second book mentioned by Eusebius is a liturgy preserved in fragmentary form as Fragment 17”7.

That Perler’s theory is “the only remaining possibility” to explain the Bodmer hymn fragment is highly questionable. Even though Hall reminds us that Fragment 17 is associated with Melito only by the fact that it fol-lows Peri Pascha in the Bodmer Codex, Stewart-Sykes has rejected Hall’s conclusions and followed Perler8. Indeed, at least in some publications, “Fragment 17” (the seventeenth fragment of material allegedly by Melito) has become the de facto designation of this text, superseding its identifi ca-tion as Papyrus Bodmer 12.

This article questions these assumptions in light of an investigation of the fragment Papyrus Bodmer 12, an investigation which seeks to il-luminate the nature and characteristics of the hymn fragment within the context of the codex as a whole.

The Bodmer Miscellaneous Codex9

“The Bodmer Codex” is a designation of convenience given to this disas-sembled miscel lane ous Greek codex of which, most famously, Papyrus 72 (1 and 2 Peter and Jude) was one part10. The sections were published sepa-

6 Hall (ed.), On Pascha (see note 4), xxxviii.7 Stewart-Sykes, Lamb’s High Feast (see note 4), 127. But see B.S. Pseutonkas, Melitonos

Sardeon “Ta peri tou Pascha dyo”/Melito’s of Sardes “The two writings of Pascha”, ABla 8, Thessaloniki 1971, 244, who concludes that the two books mentioned by Eusebius constituted two parts of one and the same work entitled “On Pascha.” Others have specu-lated that one of the books mentioned by Eusebius may have been Pseudo-Hippolytus, In Sanctum Pascha. See Pseutonkas, pages 17-19.

8 Stewart-Sykes, Lamb’s High Feast (see note 4), 179.9 Hereafter, “Bodmer Codex.” This article follows the view of T. Wasserman that the

codex is a miscellany, a group of manuscripts consciously collected together, as opposed to a composite, a collection of heterogeneous material that was added to randomly over time. This miscellaneous codex consists of documents that share certain unifying themes. See T. Wasserman, “Papyrus 72 and the Bodmer Miscellaneous Codex”, NTS 51, 2005, (137-154) 142.

10 P72 = Papyrus Bodmer 7 and 8; see Wasserman, “Papyrus 72” (see note 9), 137. Despite the occasional identifi cation of the designation “P72” with the entire Bodmer Codex, this article assumes that the nomenclature refers to the New Testament manuscripts only; see K. Aland/B. Aland, The Text of the New Testament, Grand Rapids 1987, esp. 92.



„A Fragment of an Early Christian Hymn (Papyrus Bodmer 12) 405

rately by the Bodmer Library in Geneva, beginning in the late 1950s. The recent photographic facsimile edition of Martin Bircher contains plates of all the Bodmer papyri, including the Bodmer Codex documents, although it does not keep the Bodmer Codex materials together11.

Recent work by Tommy Wasserman and Tobias Nicklas has confi rmed the judgment of Bodmer editor Michel Testuz regarding a reconstruction of the order of documents in the codex. The codex contained the follow-ing writings, which were copied by at least three different scribes. Testuz included a useful overview (here somewhat modifi ed) of the contents12:

– Nativity of Mary (Protevangelium of James; Papyrus Bodmer 5)– Apocryphal Correspondence (3rd Corinthians 1 and 3; Papyrus Bodmer 9)– 11th Ode of Solomon (Papyrus Bodmer 11)– Jude (Papyrus Bodmer 7)– Melito’s Paschal Homily (Papyrus Bodmer 13)– a Fragment of a Liturgical Hymn (Papyrus Bodmer 12)– Apology of Phileas (Papyrus Bodmer 20)– Ps 33,2-34,16 LXX (Papyrus Bodmer 9)– 1 and 2 Peter (Papyrus Bodmer 8)

The Bodmer Codex was made up of various documents, including some materials recombined from earlier codices. This recombination is seen in multiple systems of pagination, slight variation in the page sizes of some sections, and by the presence of remnants of earlier bindings. Consistent with this is the presence of various scribal hands. Usage of nomina sacra, colophons, and marginal notes is inconsistent within the codex – not un-expected with recombined materials.

The fact that the Bodmer Codex was at least partially recombined from earlier components is consistent with the judgment that the codex is a miscellany, that is, a conscious grouping of documents as opposed to a random grouping. In light of these observations, we must exercise caution in our conclusions about the so-called “hymn fragment” (Papyrus Bodmer 12), especially about its alleged relationship to Melito and Peri Pascha.

11 Bibliotheca Bodmeriana/La collection des Papyri Bodmer. Manuscrits des textes grecs classiques, grecs et coptes bibliques et de littérature chrétienne, du 2e au 9e siècle, édi-tion complète d’un des plus importants fonds de textes antiques et bibliques, éd. par la Fondation Martin Bodmer par les soins de Martin Bircher, 10 vols., Munich 2000.

12 M. Testuz, L’Épître de Jude, les deux Épîtres de Pierre, les Psaumes 33 et 34, PapyBod 7-9, Cologny-Genève 1959, 8; see B. Metzger/B. Ehrman, The Text of the New Testa-ment: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration, 4th ed., New York 2005, 58; cf. Wasserman, “Papyrus 72” (see note 9), 140. See also T. Nicklas, Der “lebendige Text” des Neuen Testaments: Der Judasbrief in P72 (P.Bodmer VII), ASEs 22, 2005, (203-222) 205; T. Nicklas/T. Wasserman, “Theologische Linien im Codex Bodmer Miscellani?”, in: T.J. Kraus/T. Nicklas (eds.), New Testament Manuscripts: Their Texts and Their World, Texts and editions for New Testament study 2, Leiden 2006, (161-188) 162.




The Hymn Fragment (Papyrus Bodmer 12)

The following general observations about the hymn fragment are relevant: 1) the fragment displays a poetic or hymnic character; 2) the fragment is Christian; 3) as with the other documents of the codex, the fragment is in Greek; 4) the fragment was passed down as a fragment or excerpt; and 5) the fragment is incomplete. We turn now to comments on each of these observations.

1) Virtually all scholars agree that the fragment has a poetic or hym-nic character13. The agreement ends there, however, with different schol-ars attempting to fi nd a liturgical “Sitz im Leben” in various aspects of Christian practice. Perler concluded that the hymn had associations with the early Christian Agape, but not the Eucharist, since there is no mention of bread14. He argues for an early date of the fragment based on the use of ¤gioi for Christians. Regarding the phrase, °sate tÍ mhtr… (“praise to the Mother”), Perler cites favorably the work of A. Müller (“Ecclesia – Maria”), who fi nds early evidence in Asia Minor for referring to the church as our mother15.

On the other hand, Hall sees in the fragment a connection to initiation, probably baptism. This is refl ected in his translation of line 4, “You have been exalted to be brides and bridegrooms […]” (Øyèqhte, nÚmfai kaˆ numf…oi)16. Against Hall’s somewhat tendentious translation which seems to imply a close temporal connection to baptism, I would argue this close connection is not present in the text.

Stewart-Sykes bases his conclusions on the debated assumptions (among others) that the hymn fragment was believed to be from Melito and may be the second work mentioned by Eusebius, and refl ects Quartodeciman eschatology as found in their paschal liturgy17. Other questions aside, these assertions about the Bodmer hymn fragment should be challenged based on the evidence of the Bodmer Codex itself.

2) The fragment is Christian. Stewart-Sykes comments that “there is no specifi cally Christian content in the fragment: it could equally be gnostic” (sic)18. By this comment I assume Stewart-Sykes means that there is noth-ing explicitly “orthodox” Christian in the fragment, which includes the clearly Christian statement (line 5) hÛrate tÕn numf…on Ømîn CristÒn (“you have found your bridegroom, Christ”). At this point it need only be said that the hymn is Christian, and not a pagan hymn to the gods. It is likely

13 The Óti of line 5 may betray an adaptation of the hymn.14 Perler, Hymnus (see note 4), 62f.15 A. Müller, Ecclesia – Maria. Die Einheit Marias und der Kirche, Par. 5, Fribourg 1955,

esp. 56f.16 Hall (ed.), On Pascha (see note 4), xxxviii-xxxix and 85.17 Stewart-Sykes, Lamb’s High Feast (see note 4), 179-181.18 Stewart-Sykes, Lamb’s High Feast (see note 4), 180.




that those who kept and copied the fragment did so with the assumption that it was not gnostic.

3) The fragment is in Greek, as are all the other documents contained in the codex. Though perhaps “obvious,” the implications of this observa-tion should not be overlooked. The documents were copied and the codex was assembled by Coptic scribes, whose copy mistakes and marginal notes demonstrate their uneven abilities in Greek. It is worth noting that only some 100 km away from the site of the Bodmer Codex fi nd in Egypt (a Pachomian monastery?), scribes translated Greek texts into Coptic in what we now know as the Nag Hammadi library. Moreover, the hymn fragment shows signs that it may have sprung from a Syriac original (see below page 411f.). The diverse nature and origins of the various Bodmer Codex documents suggest a broad interest on the part of the collector(s), which includes an appreciation of literature stemming from both Palestine and Greek-speaking church communities.

4) The hymn “fragment” is probably better considered an excerpt19. While most scholars agree that the text appears to be part of a larger whole, it is “self-contained” – that is, it stands alone, containing complete thoughts and sentences. Moreover, this text is not fragmentary because its last lines were on pages now lost, nor was text lost due to degraded page edges. This suggests that the fragment had value for the collector(s) of the Bodmer Codex independent of its original (possibly liturgical) use. Its presence is consistent with the whole of the Bodmer Codex, which includes other excerpts as well, albeit longer ones: Ode of Solomon 11,1-24 (Papyrus Bodmer 11), and Ps 33,2-34,16 LXX (Papyrus Bodmer 9). In addition, we note that in the Bodmer Codex, the text of “3rd Corinthians” (Papyrus Bodmer 10) includes only chapters 1 and 3, as compared with other manuscripts.

Since the fragmentary nature of the hymn as passed down suggests that liturgical use was not the collectors’ main interest, we may assume that content – theological content – was likely the main reason for preserving and collecting this fragment. The small size of the codex pages suggests to many that this volume was intended for private, possibly devotional, use. Additionally, given the nature of the Bodmer Codex as a collection of excerpts as well as complete documents, and that the excerpts should be viewed as having had value in themselves for the collector(s), there is no compelling reason to attribute the fragment to Melito simply because it follows Peri Pascha in the Bodmer Codex arrangement. In fact, the style and especially the content of the hymn fragment is enough different from Peri Pascha that we have no solid grounds for positing a connection between the two documents.

19 Insofar as “fragment” may imply accidental or coincidental shortening, but “excerpt” implies a conscious decision by a collector. I continue to use the term “hymn fragment” for the sake of convenience.




5) Finally, we have to remember that the hymn fragment is incomplete. It is not legitimate to draw far-reaching conclusions about its origins or theology, and present them as fact. On the other hand, a few cautious observations may be made.

Some Observations on Specifi c Aspects of the Hymn fragment

The text consists of six lines at the top of a page numbered XD (64), on the verso of the last page of Melito’s Peri Pascha (numbered XG/63)20. The hymn fragment is marked off from the next part of the page with two horizontal lines – one above and one below what appears to have been three or four lines of text. Those lines of text appear to have been rubbed out or marked through, and are not legible. Below that section (and roughly even with the left margin created by the hymn text at the top of the page) is a crude decorative fi gure somewhat similar to those found at the end of both 1 and 2 Peter (Papyrus Bodmer 8)21. Except for that decorative fi gure, and what may have been a few letters or fi gures that appear to have been erased, the remainder of the page (ca. the bot-tom one-third) is blank.

The fragment’s position in relation to Peri Pascha may indicate that the hymn fragment was copied after the recombination of the Melito manuscript into the Bodmer Codex. Although the brevity of the hymn frag-ment makes a defi nitive judgment impossible, there are enough differences between the orthography of Peri Pascha and that of the hymn fragment to raise doubts as to whether they were copied by the same scribe22. For example, there are two examples of nomina sacra with over-bars in the hymn fragment, the fi rst in line one (P8R8A8), the other in line fi ve (C8R8N8). Both instances are followed by a space. An over-bar is also used at the end of line fi ve to indicate an abbreviated word (O INO8, instead of OINON). But while the over-bars in the hymn fragment are straight lines, those of Peri Pascha are often a cursive-like “swoosh.” Nomina sacra in Peri Pascha are not usually followed by a space23. Iticisms are relatively few in Peri Pascha, but noticeable in the hymn fragment. In addition, although Peri Pascha contains short superscripted strokes throughout (presumably copy-

20 Observations based on Bircher’s facsimile edition.21 The small fi gure, several horizontal parallel lines of diminishing length (creating a roughly

triangular shape), occurs on the right and left margins together with decorative cross-hatch page breaks at the end of both 1 and 2 Peter. While the 1 and 2 Peter fi gures have the longest line at the top, the fi gure on the hymn fragment page is inverted, with the longest line at the bottom.

22 Contra Stewart-Sykes, Lamb’s High Feast (see note 4), 180, who asserts the two docu-ments are in the same hand.

23 Occasionally in Peri Pascha a nomen sacrum is followed by “half space,” but rarely a space large enough for a full-sized character, as in the hymn fragment.




ist marks or reader’s aids), this does not occur in the hymn fragment24. On another note, neither the hymn fragment nor Ps 33 LXX (Papyrus Bodmer 9) have titles25, while all the other Bodmer Codex documents have titles26. This lack of titles is easily explained given the status of the two documents as excerpts. Again, in the case of the “missing” title, as with its other features, it is not necessary to conclude that the hymn fragment is conceptually linked to Peri Pascha.

The setting of the hymn fragment is apparently that of the eschatologi-cal banquet. The scene is suggestive of the “marriage supper of the lamb” (Rev 19,9). In Revelation, a hymn of praise to God occurs just before this appellation (Rev 19,5-8)27. The “saints” (oƒ ¤gioi) are associated with the banquet in both cases. The drinking of wine suggests a banquet setting. “Our bridegroom Christ” occupies the focus of the end of the fragment. The result is an eschatological wedding banquet scene at which are present both virgins and “saints.”

The hymn of praise to the Father (Ømn»sate tÕn patšra) has many general parallels. “Praise of the Mother” (°sate tÍ mhtr…, line 2) is more diffi cult. Attempts to fi nd in this language an image of the church, or an image of Mary, are unsatisfactory. The church as “mother of the believer” is hardly an image that easily translates into an early eschatological hymn of praise. A hymn to Mary as “mother of the Bridegroom” can be found later in Christianity28. The relatively undeveloped state of Marian piety exhibited by “Nativity of Mary” (Proto evan ge lium of James; Papyrus Bodmer 5) tends to confi rm the judgment that the “mother” in the Bodmer hymn fragment is not Mary.

While the presence of “mother” terminology in gnostic texts has long been noted, the idea of gnostic infl uence upon this hymn has been rejected. This rejection is typically on the assumption that the hymn fragment is connected to Melito, which is cited as grounds for denying a gnostic prov-enance or theology. Although I cannot accept this line of reasoning, we may confi dently reject the idea that this hymn text was considered gnostic

24 Admittedly, the copyist marks in Peri Pascha may be from a later hand, and the absence of copyist marks may be merely a function of the hymn excerpt’s brevity.

25 Ps 33 LXX (Papyrus Bodmer 9) begins with verse 2, but Ps 34 LXX, which starts on the same page on which Ps 33 LXX ends, is identifi ed with a title, a fact which makes Ps 33 LXX readily identifi able.

26 All the other Bodmer Codex documents have either a superscripted title or a subscripted title (or both), or at least a title in the fi rst line. Melito’s Peri Pascha begins with its own title page, suggesting it was originally bound as a free-standing work before being recombined into the Bodmer Codex.

27 In Rev 19, the “marriage supper of the Lamb” is mentioned, but not described – it is still future.

28 Cf. a hymn to Mary, ca. 6th century: M. Harding, Two Hymns to Christ, One to Mary, in: S.R. Llewelyn (ed.), In honour of Paul Barnett, NDIEC 9, 2002, 119-121. But see S.J. Shoemaker, The Cult of the Virgin in the Fourth Century: a Fresh Look at Some Old and New Sources, in: C. Maunder (ed.), Origins of the cult of the Virgin Mary, London 2008, 71-87.




by the collectors of the Bodmer Codex. While it is interesting to note the praise of the Father in the so-called “Christ Hymn” of Acts of John 94f.: Ømn»swmen tÕn patšra (“Let us ‘hymn’ the Father”; a text thought to refl ect Valentinian infl uences), there is ancient evidence that the Christ Hymn itself circulated independently as well29. The few alleged parallels from the Nag Hammadi literature are of little interest: references to “the Father, the Mother, and the Son” as a kind of unity (together with their entire 30) are found in The Gospel of Truth (NHC I,3) 24, the Gospel of the Egyptians (NHC III,2) 41.55 or the Trimorphic Protennoia (NHC XIII,1) 37. None of these passages is close enough to our text to hold signifi cance for this study.

More interesting is the wedding hymn in the Acts of Thomas 6f., which presents a contrast between the heavenly wedding scene and a human (pagan) wedding31. The Acts of Thomas tell of the travels of Thomas to evangelize India. While underway by ship, Thomas comes to “the royal city of Andrapolis.” Acts of Thomas 6f. describes the wedding of the King’s daughter, at which Thomas sings the so-called “Hymn to the Bride.”

Section 7 of the “Hymn to the Bride” describes the bride as surrounded by seven groomsmen whom she has chosen, and seven bridesmaids who dance before here. Twelve servants minister before her and are at her bidding:

Their gaze is attentively directed at the bridegroom, / That they be enlightened by his sight, / And be forever with him in that everlasting joy, / and sit down at the wedding to which the princes assemble, / and abide at the supper, of which the eternal ones are deemed worthy […]. / (They) rejoice and exult and praise the Father of all, / whose majestic light they have received / and have been en-lightened by the sight of their Lord, / whose ambrosial food they received, / of which there is no defi ciency, / and drank also of his wine, / which brings to them neither thirst nor desire, / and they praised and with the living spirit / the Father of truth and the Mother of wisdom32.

The Syriac version of the above text identifi es Spirit and Wisdom33, and the Spirit is “mother” in the Epiklesis in Acts of Thomas 2734. This article

29 J.K. Elliott, The Apocryphal New Testament, Oxford 1993, 2006, 303; cf. 307.30 See Gospel of the Egyptians [NHC III,2] 55 (NHS 4, 112,10f. Böhlig/Wisse).31 For an attempt to locate culturally the “Hymn of the Bride”, cf. R. Valantasis, The

Nuptial Chamber Revisited: The Acts of Thomas and Cultural Intertextuality, SBL.SP 34, 1995, 380-393.

32 Translated from the Greek version in: Elliott, Apocryphal New Testament (see note 29), 450.

33 A.F.J. Klijn, The Acts of Thomas: Introduction, Text, and Commentary, NT.S 108, Leiden/Boston 22003, 38f.80f.; cf. H. Kruse, Das Brautlied der syrischen Thomas-Akten, OCP 50, 1984, (291-330) 323-325; who argues for the original identifi cation of “Spirit” and “mother” in this passage.

34 H. Kruse, Zwei Geist-Epiklesen der syrischen Thomasakten, OrChr 69, 1985, (33-53) 36: “Für den syrisch sprechenden Christen war es ganz natürlich […], daß der Hl. Geist als Mutter bezeichnet werden konnte”; J. Martikainen, Die Muttergestalt des Heiligen Gesites in der Frühen Syrischen Theologie, Markarios-Symposium über den Heiligen




does not suggest that there is any direct connection between the Bodmer hymn fragment and the Acts of Thomas (or other document). It only suggests that we see in the two documents evidence of an early Christian idea of the eschatological wedding banquet. Not only so, but “praise to the Mother of Wisdom” is probably an image of the Holy Spirit, which may suggest a Syriac background for the Bodmer hymn fragment. The Holy Spirit was occasionally referred to as “Mother” in Syriac texts (as well as some others)35. As several scholars have noted, this fi ts a Semitic language where “spirit” is a feminine noun36.

Similarly, a saying attributed to the Gospel of the Hebrews (depicting the Temptations) reads: “And if any accept the Gospel of the Hebrews – here the Saviour says: Even so did my mother, the Holy Spirit, take me by one of my hairs and carry me away on to the great mountain Tabor”37.

The phrase e„j o"non p…ete (“drink unto wine”; line 6), has caused con-siderable discus sion, and led O. Perler to emend the text (below). To my knowledge, this odd phrase is otherwise unattested in Greek38. But if we suspect a Syriac original may lay behind this hymn fragment, a simple explanation emerges: the translator misread an initial Lāmadh () as the preposition “to” (e„j), instead of as the object marker. The preposition (e„j) should probably have been omitted in Greek in favor of a direct object construction: (o"non p…ete)39. This observation, together with the presence of the “Mother” as the Spirit makes it plausible that a Syriac original

Geist, Åbo 1989, 114-127; G. Winkler, Der Heilige Geist, die Mutter: Anmerkungen zu neuen Veröffentlichungen, ThRv 93/3, 1997, (207-212) 210.

35 W. Cramer, Der Geist Gottes und des Menschen in frühsyrischer Theologie, MBTh 46, Münster 1979, 68f.: cf. Kruse, Zwei Geist-Epiklesen (see note 34), 36; G. Winkler, Über-legungen zum Gottesgeist als mütterlichem Prinzip und zur Bedeutung der Androgynie in einigen frühchristlichen Quellen, T. Berger/A. Gerhards (Hgg.), Liturgie und Frauenfrage. Ein Beitrag zur Frauenforschung aus liturgiewissenschaftlicher Sicht, PiLi 7, St. Ottilien, 1990, (7-29) 7.

36 Mentioned by Hier., in Mich. II 7,5-7 (CChr.SL 76, 513,311f. Adriaen). Note the feminine pronoun for the Spirit in Ephr., Homilia de Christi nativitate 5,10 (ClWS, 107 McVey). Modern examples include H. Koester, Introduction to the New Testament, vol. 2. His-tory and Literature of Early Christianity, Philadelphia 1982, 223; cf. Kruse, Brautlied (see note 33), 325; Winkler, Der Heilige Geist (see note 34), 210.

37 Gospel of the Hebrews, fragment 3. English translation is taken from: E. Hennecke/W. Schneemelcher, New Testament Apocrypha, vol. 1. Gospels and related writings, London 1965, 164. Cf. Martikainen, Die Muttergestalt (see note 34), 115. This passage is cited in Or., Jo. II 12,87 (GCS Origenes IV, 67,19-21 Preuschen); cf. Or., hom. in Jer. 15 4 (GCS Origenes III, 128,27f. Klostermann/Nautin); and Hier., in Mich. II 7,5-7 (see note 36). My thanks to Prof. Ron Heine for calling my attention to the “Gospel of the Hebrews” passage.

38 A “Thesaurus Linguae Graecae” search turned up only our hymn fragment.39 Note the analogous phenomenon in the Greek Old Testament translation of Aquila, where

the Hebrew object marker -t) was occasionally translated by the preposition “with” (as sÚn plus accusative); for example, Aquila I Reges 2,22 LXX; III Reges 8,1.9.15f.24f. LXX. Cf. Aquila Gen 1,1 LXX: sÝn tÕn oÙranÕn kaˆ sÝn t¾n g»n, cited in A. Rahlfs, Geschichte des Septuaginta-Textes, in: Septuaginta, edidit R. Hanhart, Stuttgart 2006, XXI-XXIII (number 4).




lay behind this excerpt40. Not only so, but we fi nd in Syriac theology the image of Christ as the Bridegroom, and Paradise as bridal chamber, the setting of the heavenly banquet41. The presence of such a translated Greek text with Syriac background is consistent with other documents in the Bodmer Codex with Syriac attestation, not least the excerpted 11th Ode of Solomon. That there was interest in and availability of such manuscripts in Egypt is generally confi rmed by the wide range of documents found at Oxyrhynchus42.

In general terms, it is a version of the idealized eschatological wedding banquet which we meet in the Bodmer hymn fragment, as well as in Acts of Thomas 6f., Rev 19, and perhaps also in Matt 25. The eschatology of the hymn fragment is consistent with other documents of the Bodmer Codex, notably the defense of the Parousia found in 2 Peter (Papyrus Bodmer 8) and “3rd Corinthians” 1 and 3 (Papyrus Bodmer 10). In both Acts of Thomas and in Revelation the focus is upon the bride and her preparation, and the orientation is future: God’s people – both as bride and guests – await the consummation of the marriage. Thus in Acts of Thomas, celibacy is promoted as the proper behavior for a married couple in this life, and Rev 21 anticipates the eschatological union of bride and bridegroom. The perspective of the Bodmer hymn fragment appears to be one of “realized” eschatology, which may be due to an original connection to baptism. If the excerpt was intended to portray the heavenly wedding banquet, then a “realized” eschatological statement such as “You have found your Bridegroom, Christ,” is perfectly understandable. It is the wedding supper which in Revelation 19-22 is only anticipated.

Conclusion

There is nothing in the Bodmer hymn fragment that compels us to accept a direct connection to Melito and Peri Pascha. The nature of the Bodmer Codex, a recombined collection of complete documents and excerpts, suggests rather that these materials have been collected for their content, not their alleged authorship. Both the phrases “sing praise to the Mother” (line 2) and “drink unto wine” (line 6) suggest that a Syriac original may have given rise to this hymn fragment. The hymn fragment, passed down independent of its liturgical origins, presents an eschatology which

40 My thanks to Dr. Dmitri Bumazhnov for this suggestion.41 On Paradise as the setting of the heavenly wedding banquet, see Ephr., Homilia de para-

diso 9,9 (CSCO 174 = CSCO.S 78, 37 Beck [Syriac text]; CSCO 175 = CSCO.S 79, 35 Beck [German translation]); cf. Ephr., Letter to Publius 21 (FaCh 91, 353f. McVey).

42 Note also the interesting possibility that a Hebrew “Vorlage” might lie behind both the “Hymn of the Bride” in ActThom 6f. and (in a satirical opposite), the “Wiles of the Wicked Woman” of Qumran text 4Q184; cf. Y. Zur, Parallels Between Acts of Thomas 6-7 and 4Q184, RdQ 16, 1993, 103-107.




is consistent with other documents of the Bodmer Codex, an eschatology similar to the idealized picture of the heavenly wedding banquet in Acts of Thomas 6f., and Rev 19-22. The reference to “the mother” is probably best understood as a reference to the Holy Spirit, rather than to Mary or the church.

Appendix: Text and Translations of the hymn fragment (Papyrus Bodmer 12)

(i) Greek text according to M. Testuz43:

X8D8UMNHSATE TON P8R8A8 OI AGEIOI ASATE

TH MHTRI PARQENOI UMNOUMEN UPERUYOUMEN AGEIOI UYWQHTAI

NUMFAI KAI NYUMFIOI OTEI HURATE

TON NYMFION UMWN C8R8N8 EIS OINO8PIETE NUMFAI KAI NUMFIOI

(ii) Reconstruction of the Greek text according to O. Perler44:

1 Ømn»sate tÕn patšra oƒ ¤gioi,

2 °sate tÍ mhtrˆ parqšnoi

3 Ømnoàmen, Øperuyoàmen, ¤gioi.

4 Øyèqhte, nÚmfai kaˆ numf…oi

5 Óti hÛrate tÕn numf…on Ømîn CristÒn.

6 e„j a"non45 p…ete, nÚmfai kaˆ numf…oi.

(iii) French translation by M. Testuz46:

– Célébrez le père, (vous) les saints, Chantez en l’honneur de la mère, (vous) les vierges,– Nous (les) célébrons, nous (les) exaltons, (nous) les saints.– Soyez glorifi és, fi ancées et fi ancés, Car vous aves rencontré votre fi ancé, le Christ.

Buvez au vin, fi ancées et fi ancés …

43 Testuz, Fragment d’un Hymne (see note 2), 76.44 Perler, Hymnus (see note 4), 9.45 Perler emended the text here in keeping with his understanding of the text as part of an

Easter vigil of Melito. He cited as a likely explanation a “hearing mistake” on the part of the scribe (Perler, Hymnus [see note 4], 9).

46 Testuz, Fragment d’un Hymne (see note 2), 77.




(iv) German translation by Perler47:

1 “Preiset den Vater, (ihr), die Heiligen,2 Singet der Mutter, ihr Jungfrauen!3 Wir preisen, wir erheben über alle Massen, (wir) Heilige!4 Erhöht wurdet ihr, Bräute und Bräutigame,5 Weil ihr gefunden habt euren Bräutigam: Christus.6 Zum Lobe48 trinket, Bräute und Bräutigame, ......................................................................”

(v) English translation by Hall49:

Fragment 17Hymn the Father, you holy ones;sing to your Mother, virgins.We hymn, we exalt (them) exceedingly, we holy ones.You have been exalted to be brides and bridegrooms,for you have found your bridegroom, Christ.Drink for wine, brides and bridegrooms …

ZUSAMMENFASSUNG

Dieser Artikel beleuchtet die vorherrschende Ansicht über den Ursprung und die Natur des sechszeiligen Fragments des Bodmer Codex (Papyrus Bodmer 12). Dieses Fragment ist eines von vielen Auszügen innerhalb des Bodmer Codexes, dessen Material wahr-scheinlich zu persönlichen Andachtszwecken gesammelt wurde. Die paläographischen Forschungsergebnisse lassen erhebliche Zweifel an der bisher angenommenen Verbin-dung zu Melito’s „On Pascha“ aufkommen. Lässt man diese Verbindung aber einmal außer Acht, ergeben sich für das Fragment neue Deutungsmöglichkeiten. Dieser Artikel untersucht die Bedeutung des Fragments aus der Sicht der frühen Christen in Bezug auf die eschatologische Hochzeitsfeier und belegt anhand stichhaltiger Beweise, dass ein syrisches Original möglicherweise die Grundlage hierzu gebildet hat. „Lob an die Mutter“ (°sate tÍ mhtr…) bezieht sich demnach mehr auf den Heiligen Geist als auf Maria oder die Kirche.

47 Perler, Hymnus (see note 4), 10.48 See note 45.49 Hall, On Pascha (see note 4), 85.



a fragment of an early christian hymn (papyrus bodmer 12): some observations

Documents