booke. the fragments of heracleon. 1891
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
1/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
2/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
3/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
4/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
5/130
TEXTS AND STUDIESCONTRIBUTIONS TO
BIBLICAL AND PATRISTIC LITERATURE
EDITED BY
J. ARMITAGE ROBINSON B.D.FELLOW OF CHRIST'S COLLEGE CAMBRIDGE
VOL. I.
No. 4. THE FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON
CAMBRIDGEAT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS
1891
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
6/130
Ponton: C. J. CLAY AND SONS,CAMBBIDGE UNIVEESITY PKESS WAEEHOUSE,
AVE MAEIA LANE.
DEIGHTON, BELL AND CO,ILdpjifl: F. A. BROCKHAUS.
gork:
MACMILLAN ANDCO.
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
7/130
THE FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON
NEWLY EDITED FROM THE MSS.WITH AN INTRODUCTION AND NOTES
BY
A. E. BROOKE M.A.FELLOW OP KING'S COLLEGE CAMBRIDGE
CAMBRIDGEAT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS
1891
[All Rights reserved]
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
8/130
(Eambrtoge :
PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A. AND SONS,
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.
THE INSTITUTE OF MEDIAEVAL STUDIES10 EL?/: LEY
. TORCH rO G,
DEC 171831
5* ORt*T
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
9/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
10/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
11/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
12/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
13/130
THE MSS. OF ORIGEN'S COMMENTARIES ON S. JOHN.
OF the extant manuscripts of the Commentaries on S. John,three only have been used by the editors. So far as I have been
able to discover, there are seven in existence. If we count Thorn-dike's transcription of the Bodleian Manuscript, there are eight.The existence of a ninth is doubtful, but this question will be
moreeasily
discussed later on.The
three which seem to have
been used by the editors are at Paris, Rome and Oxford. The
similarity of the text contained in them and the fact that they all
contained many common lacunae, pointed to their derivation froma near common ancestor. The following pages are an attempt toshew that this ancestor still exists, though unfortunately in a bad
state of preservation, in the Library at Munich.
The Manuscripts are as follows :I. Codex Monacensis. In the Munich State Library, Graec.
cxci; thus described in the Catalogue,
"Bombycinus charta obso-
leta et laesa atramento flavescente literis minutis et elegantibus
frequenti abbreviatione in folio, if. 305, saec. xni. foliorum ordine
turbato male conservatus et inscriptus v\. pifi', Origenis Comm.in Matt, et Jn."
Of the Commentaries on S. John it contains Bks. 1. 2. 6. 10.
13. 19. 20. 28. 32 (33 according to Hardt's Catalogue, but this is
an error). Thus the MS. follows the true division of the Books.
The Ferrarian division (that invented or adopted by Ambrosius
Ferrarius in his translation) into 32 books is added in the margin
by a later hand.
Minuscules are used, hangingfrom ruled
lines,there
beingone
column of 30 lines on each page, in the Commentaries on S. John.
B. 1
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
14/130
2 THE FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON.
The Commentaries on S. Matthew are in another hand and contain36 lines on a page. In both red semi-capitals are often used at
the beginning of sentences, but not uniformly. The MS. is stainedat the top and bottom, and worm-eaten in many places. The orderof the folios in S. Matthew is much confused, and one or two pagesare wanting.
The title-page of the MS. has the following description :
"Origenis in D. Matt. Ev. tomus 11 init. mut. 12. 13. 14. 15.
16. et in evang. Johann. torn. 1. 2. 6. 9. 13. 19. 20. 32."
In the middle of the page are the arms, below which is written :
"Ex electorali Bibliotheca sereniss. utriusque Bavariae Ducum."This description is inaccurate. Most of Bk. x. of the Comm.
in Matt, is there, and also Bk. xvn. And with regard to theComm. in Joann. 9 is a mistake for 10, and 28 should have beeninserted.
Huet mentions a MS. of the Commentaries on S. Matthew inhis Origeniana in. iii. 12. "In Catalogo librorum ducis Bavariae
notatur Tomus Undecimus initio quoque mutilus cum proximesequentibus quinque." And as to the Commentaries on S. John hewas again misinformed. "Eosdem (i.e. 1. 2. 6. 10. 13. 19. 20. 28.
32) complectitur Tomos praeter decimum et vigesimum octavummemoratus liber in bibliothecae Bavaricae Catalogo" (ill. iii. 14).
The 10th and the 28th books are contained, as well as the rest, inthe Manuscript. The Catalogue which he used must have hadthe same mistakes which occur on the title-page of the MS.
The Commentaries on S. John are preceded by a short prefacestating that in the archetype of the MS. were several marginalnotes drawing attention to Origen's blasphemies, which, the scribe
says, he has copied as he found them.
II. Codex Venetus. In the Bibliotheca Marciana at Venice,Graec. 32. The title as given in the MS. itself is
et? TO Kara MarOaiov KOI KCUT laydvvrjv
/cap$r]va\. ratv Toi/.
The MS. is dated 1374. It is written in minuscules hangingfrom ruled lines, with one column of 36 lines on a page, and about
60 letters in each line. It consists of ff. 330 of which ff. 1 117
contain the Comm. in Matt. Bks. 10 17 (inclusive). F. 118 con-tains a preface on Origen's blasphemy, beginning TroXXtSu (JLCV and
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
15/130
THE MSS. OF ORIGEN'S COMMENTARIES ON s. JOHN.
ending teal avOis a^rw^eOa. This preface has nothing to do with
the preface in the Munich Codex concerning the marginal notes in
its ancestor. The words TOV /3a9 at the head of this prefacepoint probably to some connexion with Constantinople. Ff. 112
(recto) 294 (verso) contain the Commentaries on S. John. So
far the folios are numbered. The remainder, to 330, are left blankand unnumbered.
This MS. was used by Ambrosius Ferrarius, who in A.D. 1551translated the Commentaries on S. John into Latin. They are
divided in the MS. into 32 books. "A callido librario in Tomostriginta duos distributus fuit, hac arte lacunas et hiatus celare, et
apud incautos dissimulare, et pro integro venditare volente," saysHuet. The fraud is sufficiently patent; if conviction were necessary,we have only to look at the fragments quoted as from the fourthand fifth books of the Commentaries in the Philocalia. The diver-
gences between the text of this MS. and Ferrarius's translation are
not more than can be accounted for by the loose and paraphrasticcharacter of translations of that time, or by the necessity of original
composition to which he was sometimes reduced in consequence of .
his inability to understand the Greek, which is in some places too
corrupt for conjecture.At the end of the MS. the following note has been added :
"Fuit copiatus per Georgium Triphonium
di
Maluasiae et finitto ad X Ottobr. 1555."
To this we shall have occasion to refer when we are dealingwith the seventh manuscript. The same scribe is known to havebeen working at Venice also in 1548 (see Gardthausen, Griechische
Palaeographie, p. 322).
III. Codex Regius. Graec. CDLV. in the Bibliotheque Natio-nale at Paris
;thus described in the manuscript itself:
"|* 'Qpiyevovs T&V et
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
16/130
4 THE FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON.
In the early parts of the Commentaries on S. Matthew the
folios are inwrong
order and there arelarge
lacunae. The Codexis written in minuscules hanging from ruled lines. This was the
MS. on which Huet based his text, though his text is not identicalwith that of the MS., as Delarue seems often to have assumed. It
was used by Perionius in his translation of the Commentaries on
S. John.
IV. Codex Bodleianus. Misc. 58: used by Delarue. This
MS. is described in the Bodleian Catalogue as being of the 17thCentury. Its resemblance to II. is very close. It is now boundin three volumes of which the first contains ff. 183, the second
183, and the third 182. It contains only the Commentaries on
S. John. In the margin it has two sets of emendations. The first
are introduced by the word Ta%a and are for the most part based
on Ferrarius's Latin Version. The second, which are distinguished
by the word Ifo-w?, are later and inferior. In the copy of Huetbelonging to the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge, Bentleyhas noted in the margin a great many readings from this MS.,
though apparently he did not make a full collation1
.
V. Codex Barberinus I. In the Barberini Library at Rome ;of the 15th or 16th Century, in the opinion of the Librarian,
M. 1' Abbs' Pieralisi. It contains the Commentaries on S. Matthew
(beginning at Book X. rore
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
17/130
THE MSS. OF ORIGEN 8 COMMENTARIES ON S. JOHN. 5
about 40 letters in a line. It contains the preface which is found
in Codex Yenetus, headed by the words + rov /3a9 +,
beginning onthe
2ndrecto TroXXcT^ rov
wptyevrjv alperiKovvirdp-)(ew ^i]^>icra^ev(t)v, and ending on the 2nd verso KOI av6i
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
18/130
6 THE FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON.
VIII. The transcription of Codex Bodleianus (IV.) made byHerbert Thorndike needs no further
description.It is now in the
Library of Trinity College, Cambridge (numbered B. 9. 11). It is
not without value however, as the writer has inserted several con-
jectural emendations in the margin, and there are also three pagesof critical notes at the beginning.
IX. The existence of a ninth MS. is doubtful. In Miller's
Catalogue of the Escurial Library, pp. 305 ff., is given a list, found in
one of the Escurial MSS. (x. i. 15), of the Greek Manuscripts whichbelonged to Cardinal Sirlet's Library, and passed into the posses-sion of Cardinal Ottoboni (Alexander VIII.). Subsequently Bene-
dict XIV. is said to have placed them in the Vatican. Amongthese is a MS. containing Origen's Commentaries on S. Matthew
and S. John, and Philo Hepl TOV fiiov TOV Mwo-ew?, Tlepl TOV ftlovTTO\ITIKOV (Joseph), and Tlepl VOIMWV wypdfytov (Abraham). In
the Catalogue of the Ottobonian part of the Vatican Library,which has not yet been published, but exists in manuscript in the
Vatican, I could find no trace of it. But the description answers
very nearly to the MS. now in the Barberini, which I have num-bered V. Is it possible that this MS. passed from the hands of
any of its former owners into the possession of the Barberini ? If
not, we must suppose that this MS. has been lost, unless indeedthe MS. Catalogue of the Ottobonian Manuscripts is incomplete.Delarue constantly refers to a
' Codex Barberinus/ and generallythe readings he quotes from it would seem to be taken from No. V ;but his citations are not always accurate. The existence of two
manuscripts in the Barberini does not seem to have been knownto any one.
Therelations of these
MSS.to
one another must now be con-sidered. For the sake of clearness I subjoin a diagram shewingwhat I conceive their relations to be. After this I propose to
consider the relations (1) of the Munich Codex to those MSS.which seem to be directly copied from it, (2) of the Venice Codex
to those which are, I believe, its descendants, and (3) of the
Venice to the Munich MS.
1. (a) Let us then consider first the relation of the ParisCodex to that at Munich. The contents of the two are practicallythe same, so far as concerns the subject of our present enquiry.
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
19/130
THE MSS. OF ORIGEN S COMMENTARIES ON S. JOHN.
(i) As pointed out above, the statement that the God. Monac.contains of the Comm. in Matt. Books xi. (mutilated) to XVI. isincorrect. It contains also most of Book X., and Book xvn. The
SAEC.
XIIIMonac. (I)
XIV
Yen. (II)
XV
7 \VIKeg. (Ill)
Barb. (V) Matrit. (VII)
XVII
Bodl. (IV)
mistake as to the latter point has arisen from the fact that Books
XVI. and xvii. are not divided as the other books are. But the
last words contained in this part of the MS. are eTricn-ptyat, TT/OO?avrov, the
endingof Book xvii. ; and a calculation of pages easily
shews that both Books xvi. and xvii. are contained in the MS., for
Book XV. begins on f. 62, Book xvi. on f. 77, and the Comm. inMatt, end on f. 110. Thus while Book XV. takes only ff, 15, what
is called Book xvi. takes 33, though in Lommatzsch's edition
Books XV. and xvi. cover very nearly the same number of pageseach. In the Comm. in Joann. there is no difference of contents,
(ii) The first words which occur in the Cod. Monac. are rivi Se\a^ov(nv ev rot? vTrobeecnepois which occur towards the end ofBook x. chap. 3 (Lomm. III. p. 15). In the Paris MS. the leaves
are not in right order, but the first words which occur (they are
on f. 255) are Trd\w bpoia e
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
20/130
8 THE FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON.
More direct proofs of copying are not wanting.Lomm. I. p. 118, 1. 22. Cod. Monac. has 7rapafjLfj,v...
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
21/130
THE MSS. OF ORIGEN'S COMMENTARIES ON s. JOHN. 9
I subjoin a list of their divergences (other than mere itacisms and cases ofthe addition or omission of v e(f>f\Kvo~TiK6v) which occur in the first 30 pagesof Tom. xin. of the Comm. in Joann. (Lommatzsch's edition).
Monacensis Begins
P. 1, Title TOV TO
2, 1. 10 TO
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
22/130
10 THE FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON.
Monacensis Regius
26, 14 T
27, 6 eV
8
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
23/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
24/130
12 THE FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON.
same century, and that Cod. Monac., wherever it was (I was unableto obtain any information as to its history at Munich), was neg-
lected during this period.
2. (a) The relation of the Bodleian MS. to that at Venice isnot hard to determine. Their divergences are very slight, beingfor the most part ordinary transcriptional blunders or corrections,and even of these there is only a very small number. The rest
may be explained by the fact that the scribe of the Bodleian MS.
knew Greek. Direct proofs of copying are afforded in someplaces.
Lomm. i. p. 117, 1. 12 (in the first fragment of Heracleon).After the word OvaXevrivov space is left for about nine letters.
The same lacuna occurs in Codex Venetus, but in it there has beenan erasure.
Lomrn. II. p. 7, 1. 2. After evKivrjTG) there has been an
erasure in Cod. Ven. A corresponding lacuna is left in Cod.Bodl.
7T 777775
Lomm. ii. p. 53, 1. 7. Codex Venetus reads /o%^? (sic). Cod.Bodl. has
(b) I was not able to notice any divergence of Codex Bar-
berinus I. (V) from the Venice MS. except that in the passagementioned above it leaves no space after OvaXevrlvov, from which
of course no conclusion can be drawn. The fact that the Com-mentaries on S. Matthew begin at the beginning of the 10th Book
(rore dfals TOI)? o^\oi/s), considered in connexion with the date
of the MS. (saec. xv. or xvi.), proves that it belongs to the Venice
as opposed to the Munich group, and the division into 32 books
points to the same conclusion. The following readings tend to
prove the identity of its text with that of Codex Venetus.
Lomm. I. p. 117, 1. 16 Siafyepovra yap (frrjcri Ven. Bar.II. p. 9, 1. 20 e'07? Ven. Bar.
p. 13, 1. 16 Trapa TO Ven. Bar.
(Codex Bodleianus has Trap a rov.)
p. 14, 1. 1 eV Svvarois Ven. Bar.
p. 122, 1. 1 el Ven. Bar.
p. 122, 1. 9 TOI)
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
25/130
THE MSS. OF ORIGEN'S COMMENTARIES ON s. JOHN. 13
p. 376, 1. 4 Tpiatc6rov Ven. Bar.
p. 376, 1. 6 rpia/cocrrw Sevrepq) Ven. Bar.
(Ven. has notes in the margin stating that itsexemplar
read
28th and 29th.)Lomm. II. p. 73, 1. 1, lacuna (room for 5 letters) before ovra
Ven. Bar., see above, p. 11.
(c) The correspondence of the cryptograph in the MS. atMadrid with the note at the end of Codex Venetus is sufficient
proof of the origin of the former. And with this the informationwhich I have received as to the text agrees. The lacunae in thetext (Lommatzsch i. pp. 11, 14, 18, 36, 41, 43), which occur in theCod. Venetus and which will be discussed more fully in the next
section, are also found here. And in the case of p. 41, the sug-gestion found in Cod. Ven. in the margin (ol^ai 7rapacrxf.iv ryv
vTrapfyv teal TTJV TrKacriv ical ra eiBrj) is put in the margin also in
the Madrid MS. See also I. 23, Lomm. p. 44, 1. 7 Oavpafav rrjvajBekTtiplav rcov TTO\\WV. The word a^e\TripLav is omitted inCodex Monacensis, and also in Codex Venetus, but in the latter it is
added in the margin. In Cod. Matritensis it is also added in the
margin.It can easily be shewn that O. 47 is copied from the 1st part of
the Venice MS. which contains the Commentaries on S. Matthew.Thus the colophons at Madrid exactly agree with the note in theVenice MS., except that the latter has October 10 instead of
October 2. As we can hardly imagine that the preface (TroXXcG^TOV 'Qpi
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
26/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
27/130
THE MSS. OF ORIGEN'S COMMENTARIES ON s. JOHN. 15
Bk. I. c. 22, Lomm. p. 41. rot? overt /cal 777 v\y \eyovra.This is all damaged in Cod. Monac., but the following facts are
discoverable.
(1) It omits ol^iat, and TTJV virapfyv.
(2) Between el KOI and elirelv there is room for about 23 more
letters.
(3) ea-rlv is, I think, not contained in it. The words are
illegible, but the ink has to some extent stayed on the oppositeleaf. Reading backwards, I thought I could trace somewhat as
follows :
el /cal ra? ov&las %a\e7rov [lev ovv ira^vrepov elirelv.
God. Ven. has rfj v\y (space 20) ; then /cal rd K.T.\. to el /calas in the texts
;after which (space 23), elirelv K.T.\.
In the margin it has ol^ai irapacr^elv rrjv virapfyv /cal Trjvir\d(Ttv /cal rd eiSrj.
Thus we get some valuable information by which to attempt a
restoration of the text, and very sure indications of the relationsof the two MSS.
Bk. I. c. 23, Lomm. p. 43. rt9 6 ev avrfj Xo
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
28/130
16 THE FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON.
in their right order, and nothing is missing ; hence the displace-ment and the loss of leaves in Cod. Monac. is subsequent to
1374, the date of the Venice MS.The Munich MS. has lost its first leaf
;it now begins with the
words rivi Se \dfji\lrova-iv, Bk. x. c. 3, Lomm. p. 15. These occurin Cod. Ven. on the 2nd recto, line 5.
We may first notice two omissions, due to homoioteleuton, inCod. Ven. of words contained in Cod. Mon.\ as indications of
course, not as proofs.
Bk. XI. c. 18, Lomm. pp. 120, 121. o ^coXo? Kal rpav} earaco 2&>Xo9. Cod. Ven. omits /cal rpavrj o ^o>Xo?.
Bk. XII. c. 1, Lomm. p. 127. /cal (ftapiaaloL Trpecrfievovcri,yap ol JAW
r
le- TeXeaOai.
povcra\r}fjL, a7rw\eiav ava\o-
ytav %ov
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
29/130
THE MSS. OF ORIGEN'S COMMENTARIES ON s. JOHN. 17
guides for conjectural restoration. The Venice Codex is our best
authority for this group of the MSS. of the Comm. in Matt,in the
placeswhere Cod. Monacensis is now
defective,as the
other direct copies of this MS. have apparently been made sinceits mutilation. The alterations introduced by the scribe of
Cod. Yen. frequently deserve consideration, and are not seldom
obviously right.The marginal notes on blasphemy suggest the possibility
of the suppression of some passages on account of the doctrine
contained in them. But all the lacunae and there are several inCod. Monac. due to its original, besides those due to the damagedone to the MS. itself cannot be explained by this hypothesis : of
this Bk. XIIL c. 32 will serve as an example. But while muchmust be given up as no longer recoverable, a good deal of light
may be thrown on the text of many passages in the Commentaries
by the use of Cod. Monac. With a view to further work on themI made a collation in September 1889 of the Commentaries onS. John.
Huet knew of the Manuscript, but does not seem to haveused it. He occasionally agrees with it against the Paris MS.on which his text was based, but such readings are probablyemendations of his own, or were suggested by the versions.
Throughthe version of Ferrarius he became
acquaintedwith
a text like that of the Venice MS.Delarue's wider knowledge whether he had examined any
MSS. himself I cannot discover is marred by inaccuracy ofstatement as to the readings contained in MSS. In particularhe seems to have taken it for granted that any reading adopted
by Huet in his text was necessarily that contained in the
Paris Codex. The undue influence of this Codex, which it hasexercised owing to its relation to Huet's text, must be set aside.
But when all has been done that is possible by the ordinarymethods of textual criticism, a large sphere will remain in which
conjectural emendation alone can be of any avail.
The notes of Th. Mangey preserved in the British Museum
(MSS. Add. 6428) do not contain fresh material. Those on the
Commentaries on S. John appear to be a partial collation of
Huet's text with something of the type of Cod. Venetus, not the
B. 2
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
30/130
18 THE FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON.
Bodleian MS. which is at times mentioned separately. Possiblyhe was working with the Codex Barberinus of that type. But
whatever his sourcewas,
it containsnothing helpful
which is not
otherwise known.
It may be worth while to bring together here some examplesfrom Cod. Monac. of important New Testament Readings ofan ancient type, which have been subsequently brought into
conformity with the ordinary Syrian text, either by its correctors
or in its descendants. These will be sufficient to shew that it
may throw some further light on the problem of the text ofthe New Testament used by Origen, while they will serve toillustrate the manner in which the text of quotations from theNew Testament has been handled in the MSS. of the Fathers.
In the following list of some pre-Syrian readings supported by Cod.Monac. I have added in a few cases interesting readings from the other MSS.
In these cases the MS. authority is added in brackets.
Lomm. i.
p. 177. Jn. i. 15. o flirw. See Tisch. (Or.4 ' 102
)
Jn. i. 18. novoyevr)? 6eos. (See above, p. 8.)o &v om. Heracleon (?)
210. Jn. i. 24. aTreoraX/xe'i/ot. See Tisch. (Or.4 ' 123
)
211. Mb. iii. 10. tffy dt K a\ (Ven.)214 f. Mk. i. 2. om. t^poo-Bev o-ov. See Tisch. (Or.
4 - 125)
222. Jn. i. 26. eo-Trjicev
Jn. i. 27. avTos COTIV 6 om.
(but in Or. vi. 23 Mon. ins. o). See Tisch. (Or. 4>13 )234. Jn. i. 26. o-nJKt (Heracleon)
etonjKct (Bodl. Ven. Cf. Eusebius)
[292. Mk. i. 27. Mapfydrjo-av. See Tisch. (Or.4 - 1
"
)]
[293. Luke iv. 40. eOfpanevev (Paris. Ven. Monac. )eucpaTTfvcrfv (Bodl.)]
Lomm. n.
p. 5. 1 Cor. iv. 11. yvfiviTvofj.v (Par. Bodl. Mon. Ven.)9. Jn. iv. 16. a-ov rov avbpa (Bodl. Veil.)
18. Jn. iv. 14. ou St^crei (Ven.)ov
fj.r) 8i\fsrjo~i (Bodl.)
ovfj,fi 8i\lsi]o-T] (Par. Mon.)
See Tisch. (Or.4 - 220
)
57. Jn. iv. 31. eV TO> ^ra^v 8t (Bodl. Ven.)68. Jn. xiv. 28. o irarrip 6 Tre/n^as- /nc
om. o Trarrip (Bodl. Ven.)
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
31/130
THE MSS. OF ORIGEN'S COMMENTARIES ON s. JOHN. 19
92. Mt. xii. 42. 2oAo/ixn
v KOIo-w^a (Monac. Ven.)
130. Mt. viii. 8. o TTOLS pov om. (Par. Mon.)248. Mt. v. 28. os av >/3Xe'\/^ (Mon.)264. Jn. viii. 44. ov< co-TrjKev (Par. Mon.)
N.B. It will be seen that in the above list I have given some examplesof readings not pre-Syrian. These are cases of attestation where further
examination of the Manuscripts of Origen has corrected or supplementedDelarue's
information,on which of course Tischendorf
depended. Thereferences to Tischendorf are to his critical digest in locc. His references
to Origen (e.g. Or4 ' 220
)refer to the volume and page in Delarue's edition.
It only remains to say a few words about Catenae on S. John.
At Munich there are two fragments attributed to Origen in aCatena of the xith century (Gr. 437). At Home there are severalin the Catenae Vat. 1423, Regin. 9. The larger fragment in theMunich Catena occurred also with considerable variations in
Regin. 9. I was unable at Rome to do more than glance at these
fragments. The fragments pointed to the same conclusions as
may be drawn from an examination of those published by Cor-derius from an Antwerp MS. Most of them at any rate mighthave come from Origen 's pen, so far as opinions are concerned.
But in the comparatively few instances where they cover commonground with the extant Commentaries, the text and even the
contents are either wholly different or widely divergent. Someof them have the appearance of being taken from Homilies, others
from eTrKTrjfjLeittHreis. The nearest agreement with the extant
Commentaries was in the case of two fragments in Regin. 9, where
the text of Orig. Comm. in Joann. XXXII. 11 a-Tj/jLeitocrr) Be rlva
rpoTTov a'rjfjLau'OfjLevti) and 13 evret ovv tye/crav (Lomm. p. 435and p. 449) occurred almost exactly, but in each case the rest of22
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
32/130
20 THE FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON.
the fragment was different from the text of the Commentaries.
Nor was the result of a closer examination of two Catenae, xxvii
(saec. x.) and xxvm (saec. XL), at Venice different. Of thesethe former contains more matter, though occasionally the frag-ments in the latter have pieces omitted in Cod. xxvii. On the
whole, however, Cod. XXVIIT. is much more curtailed. The greaterpart of what is contained in Corderius is in Cod. xxvii. ; some-
times he gives the fullest text, and sometimes the Venice MS. is
fuller. There is also a good deal at Venice which is not found in
his edition. There is, I think, a close connexion between Ven.xxvii. and Regin. 9 at Rome, but I did not bring away enoughinformation from Rome to determine this. I was able at Veniceto copy all the fragments attributed to Origen in the Catena on
S. John in Cod. xxvii. Much more must be done elsewherebefore they can be made serviceable, but there is promise ofconsiderable addition to the published writings of Origen from
this Catena alone, though the critic's knife is not unneeded.
The textual results are the same as might be gathered from
the MSS. at Munich and Rome. The sense of lost parts of theCommentaries may be recovered, but not much of the actualtext. This of course was to be expected. I can only conclude
with the hope that I may be able to bring to light some of this
buried matterif I
am allowedto
continue working at the text ofOrigen's Commentaries on S. John.
As I intend to quote in the apparatus criticus readings fromthe Munich MS. only, I subjoin a full collation of the first 30
pages of Tom. xin. of the Commentaries on S. John, in the
edition of Lommatzsch, with Codd. Monacenis (M), Venetus (V),
Regius (P), and Bodleianus (B). The quotations of differences
of accent or breathing, of obvious itacistic blunders and v e
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
33/130
THE MSS. OF ORIGEN S COMMENTARIES ON S. JOHN. 21
P. 1, Title TO
1 av
ro V M
410
P. 2, 1. 1
9, 10 7Tt TO
10 TO~
10
11
11 a'XX'
15 eWt
18 ws avTos
P. 3, 1. 4 alrrjcraL9
CK TOV1
12
13
14 &15 TOV
1 6 eTTlXtTToVTOS
16 Kaff O
1 8 811^17 v
18 y
2 1 Stcyoyyv^c
P. 4, 1. 3
3
5
6
6
99
11
12
13
13
1313
aTTOKTetvai
Et7T
VfJUV
7TtV(OVTtOI/
yoyyvo*/xov eTrotow ot
Xoy ot
ante OT
e/3o'r;cr
M
MMom. VB^ -D
7Tt TOO .T
;V P
O
' ~DCTTCt Jr
om. MPa'XXd MYCOTtV M
MPM
f /3a0 os MYBbis V
M^v MP
eva MTOVTOV MP
7rtXet7rOI/TO9 MPKO.OZ VBSeu/r^v MP
f om. VB
MM Xevtrwv Pf ?7jU,0a B
f ins. Xeyoj/TS VB
MP-Ts MVB
V
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
34/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
35/130
THE MSS. OF ORIGEN S COMMENTARIES ON S. JOHN. 23
7 d
10 eVl
11
1 3 aXXeTat
16 ad fin. cap. 3
P. 8, 1. 3post ^arl
5 OSt 7Tt
5
5
6 Tr)V
Orjvai eoTiv, t TIS
7 7ro
8
post Trtwrjv /cat
12 TO TTpoVcDTTOV13 -
P. 9, 1.
14 Xeyovra1 5
3 Tt
5* > *OVT av6 TTICW
6t \
otovei
8 cTrayyeXXero8 post Trapc
8 ^i/
9, 10 ToV avSpa1 1 C
15 TOV
15 Snj/rjv17
1 7 a
20 ow
Olii. MP67T t MStaXX^rat P
MPV in mg. opa o aP in mg. opa d dvayo...ft\aa-yj-
/JLLO.V TiKpio-
M in mg. opa o ai/ayti/wo-Kwi/ (3\a(r-
ins. o MPf ins. TO YB
MM
e TIS et MR2 : om. omnino P
om. MPV7TOir)TOV M
V TTins. TO V
t7TO/Jtl/ PTO 7rpOO"W7T(i) P
M7rpOO"W7T(U MVB
VBt M
om. PVBoMP
Cir MTraparrjprjTaLOV Motov ei MPeTrryyyeXXcTO VB
f ins. auTTj VByap MPo~ov TOV aVSpa VBeTTto'Tr/o'o/xev MPTWV P
PMVP: B mg. Ta
aXXo/xevov Mv VB
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
36/130
24 THE FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON.
20
P. 10, 1. 1
1
3\/TOV
4 CTTTtt
5 post ypa'cti/7 rfv
9 "A
10 rjviv
11
12 f.
14 &rtlIK "1 c^ovtrt
16 TTCTTWKCKTl
1 8 7ra \
(TTl
f 1^ VBR^ B mg. Ta Xa ^cZaf 7^ B T? 3e V
ccrriv Mom. P
ins. o Vrj MP r^ #OLKOlHl) i
^aAatTTtoTepa MPt TO MVPB
AeAaA7^Kao"tv M0^9 MCOTIV M
MPf $aVoi/Ta VBf 8t8aKTt/ca VBt ins. TOV MVB
aAAo/xcvov MTrrjyirjv
VBf om. VB
em9 MMms M
f aKaipeo-TCpot VBom. VB]a/x,apems Ml7TtVV MVBep^oo/xat VB5a/xapetVts M
MITI aiTet B mg.
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
37/130
THE MSS. OF ORIGEN S COMMENTARIES ON S. JOHN. 25
23 _
P. 13, 1. 1 avrfjs
1 ante vvv
3 a/
5 S^Xov OTI
6
9
11, 12 aXXo/xc'vov
13 aVo
15 VTTO16 TTCOt TOV
17 005
P. 14, 1. 1 evSeii/a rots
1, 2 e7 ante TOV
9 Xeyovros10 yivoxTKOu
P. 15, 1. 1 Etr ci^c't
2
5
10,12 aTre^ave
avSpi erepw14 7T(DS
1 9 2a/xaptrts
21 Ka^'ov
22
23
24
P. 16, 1. 2, 3 aXX* atSc'a)
5w6 a7re'
6
11
1 6 cSa>/J>, which might easily be
corrupted to wv. Possibly the original
reading may have been Trapd r^v r&v,which accounts more easily for the
corruption, if the construction thus
given to pcunv is possible. Either
of these readings will give the re-
quired contrast to Origen's positionstated just below, ?;/xets 5e aVoXoi5#ws
Tfl r)6et andnot tftrja-iv. We should also comparethe account of Irenaeus (i. v. i.),
especially the words ftaXXov de rov
Scoria 61 O.VTTJS ; and shortly before,
(of the Demiurge) XeXTjtfo'rws KIVOTL>-
fjievov VTTO T^J /uTprpos. Heracleon mayhave assumed some similar relationbetween AOYOS and So
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
65/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
66/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
67/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
68/130
56 THE EXTANT FRAGMENTS OF HEHACLEON.
Se TOV9 7roXXou9 r) $t,aopd rov 6 npoHTHC, o>9 5
KOI TOV (1ApaK\ewva, oar is avrals Xefe
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
69/130
THE EXTANT FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON. 57
avrov,
A'AAAAZON, o$r&>9 et
TTO;? dvaTre/jLircov
TAG rp^Ac, OTI
15 )(IN' KAI eK?NAl' GICIN Al
AN GMOI, nepi
nep)
8e Trdaa 7rpo(p7jrifcrj rat?. \e/creov Seon, SaTrep 'EAN A'AHAON cAAnifS a>Nh N Aa oi)8et9
10 CK6YAZGTAI GIC TTOAeMON, KOl 6 %0>/H9 AfATTHC %0)V fNOiCIN
rj npocbHTeiAN yeyove XAAKOC H)(OON H KYMBAAON
ecrriv erepov y ^%o? ^ TrpotfyrjrucrjeV avrr)v o Swr^p 'EpeyNAie,
AOK?re GN AYTA?C ZOOHN AIOONION*
/Cat El eniCT6Y6T
eMof eKe?NOC erpAye" ical
'HcAiAC, AepcoN '0 AAOC OYTOC TO?C
i' Me TIMA; OVK olSa yap el rov ao-rj/jbovfyov
TrapaSe'geTal
6^X070)9 VTTO rov Sa)T?7po9 eiraivela-Oai, rj evecm Trapa-10 (r/cevdo-aa-Oai, CLTTO TCOV rypafjxav, c9 CLTTO CJXJONHC CAAniproc
e^>' a9 dva7refjL7r6fj,60a, et9 TOV TTpb? r9 avTiK&i^kva^evepyeias TroKepov, AAH'AOY 4>ooNHC HXOY Tvy%avov
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
70/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
71/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
72/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
73/130
THE EXTANT FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON. 61
tov, ey? yu,r/Se^o9 ravrrf^ rrjs TI^T)? tj ^tcofjievov VTTO
6eov TGOV TrcoTTore Trpo^rjrevcrdvTWv. dXrjQoos 8' 009
rr} $ij;ai Tiva rwv TT/OO-
(frrjToov ^airri(TavTa. OVK diriOdvo)^ Se fyi^Gi Trvvddvea-Oai
10 TOV9 3>api
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
74/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
75/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
76/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
77/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
78/130
66 THE EXTANT FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON.
/jbei>a'
e^eracreis revrd^ew Trepl TOV TOTTOV,
7T/305 ra evT6\d)
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
79/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
80/130
68 THE EXTANT FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON.
13. Ibid. x. 19 (R IV. 194; L. I. 338).
TOV
Se Kal ra 'H/oatfXetwz'o?, #9 fyyo-i, TT}I/ elsr
lepo-
ao\vfjia avoSov (rrj/jbalvetv TJJV diro T&V v\itcwv
tyv%iicbv TOTTOV, Tvy%dvovTa el/cova rfjsf
I epJo. ii. 14. dvdpa&iv TOV Kvpiov. TO oe EfpeN IN TO ieptu,
ov%i irpovdw, oieTai elpfjaQai VTrep rov (JLTJ TTJV /c\rjcn,v 5
/Jiovrjv vorjdrjvai, rrjv %a>pt9 Trvev/juaros ftorjOeladai
VTTO TOV/cvplov' ^yLTai
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
81/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
82/130
70 THE EXTANT FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON.
KOI 5
/car'
l/CeiVCDV
\eyeo~6ai, pr) Svvd/Jievos TOV elpfiov rrj?
erdpa^ev avrov TO KAreTAi' Me w? /^) Svvdftevov VTTO
dTrayyeXkeo-Oai, ov% op&VTa TO eOos TWV civ@pu>7ro- 10
Trepl deov KOI Xp/ TO* EN rpic/N
iTr), fir} epevvrjcra^, KO,ITOI ye eVt
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
83/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
84/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
85/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
86/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
87/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
88/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
89/130
THE EXTANT FKAGMENTS OF HERACLEON. 77
GV 6 $id/3o\o
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
90/130
78 THE EXTANT FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON.
2 Tim. i. rpMxx>N TTpotbHTiKoaN /cal THC eni4>ANeiAC TOY Kvptov HMOON
'|HCOY Xpicroy. opa &e el fJLrj IBio)^ /cal irapa rrjv atcoKovQlav
TO 'YiweTc avrl TOV Ol10
Rom. ii.29.
TWV pijTwv 6 *H/>a/cXeft>j/'Iov8alot, e0 vi /col, ^i^rjaaro. olov be ecrrt TT/JO? rrjv
%ajj,apeiTi,v \eyeo~0ai, vpels oi 'lou&uot, 77 TT/OO? Z^a^apetnv,
v/jiels ol edviKoi ; aXX' oiJ/e oiftaal ye ol erepoSo^oL o irpocr-
Kwovcrw, on 7r\d
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
91/130
THE EXTANT FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON. 79
, Kal \arpevovTas uXot? Kal25 \l6ois, fiTjSe Kara 'lovSaiovs aeffeiv TO Oelov, eireiTrep
Kal avTol JJLOVOI olo/juevot, 7rl(TTacrdai Oebv, dyvoovcriv
avTov, \aTpevovTes dyye\oiTes. 25
26 PJOVOL oio/xevoi] JJLOVOIS lo^evoi.
22. Ibid. xiii. 19 (R. iv. 229 ; L. n. 33).
To fievTot, ye 'HMeTc npocKyNoyMGN o 'Hpa/cXeau/ olerat eZz>at Jo. iv. 22'O ev aloovi Kal ol CTVV avrq) e\66vre
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
92/130
80 THE EXTANT FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON.
Jo. i. 3. KTl'cTH, 09 6(7T4 X/Uvcra>9, ovSev
(TKOVTGS ij/jids 7Tpl T&V TTpO T^9 a7Tft)X6ta9 dltTY)? %pOVO)Vrj alwvcov' ov$e yap Tpavovv SvvavTai, eavT&v TOV \6yov. Sid
TOVTO avTOv? eicovTes frapanre^'^o^eBa, TOQ-QVTOV eTTaTroprj- 15
4 d\-r]0i.vovs] a\T)9o$s roi)s. 9 viov] vloi. Cod. Bodleianus habet in
margine raxa viov, sed in txt. habet viov.
must refer to the same, the tertiarypredicate (contained in dXyQ. roi)s
irpoffK.) would be very awkward.
5.dTroXwX^at]
There is of course
no necessary reference here to a
commentary of Heracleon's on S.
Luke, though we know from Clementthat he commented on some part ofit (see Frag. 50 ; Clem. Al. Strom, iv.
9. 73). Here however he only ap-pears to have explained Luke xix. 10in illustration of S. John's words.
20. Xpi
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
93/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
94/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
95/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
96/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
97/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
98/130
86 THE EXTANT FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON.
9 TO crvva^Orjvai, els dTrodiJKqv, TOVTeaTi8m 7T/o-T6ft)9 6t9 dvaTTavcriv, ocrai ye eToi/juoi,, ov yapTrdaai' al fjuev yap 77877 GTOI^OL rja'%0'fjvai 5
T}^ dirodrjicirjv Sid Trjs TTiarea)^ et9 dv air av
elvai, Kal eTTirrjSelov^ 7rpo9 crwrr]plavTOV \oyov /card fjbev rovavrwv Kal rr]v v(7i,v' /card 8e TOP eKK\7)criao-Tt,Kov
TOV rfyejaoviKov, eroi/jLov irpos re^elwcriv,f
(va Kal 10
\eKTeov ovv ?r/309 TOU9 ovrcos e/c8ea//.ez>ou9, el /3ov-\owrai
7rapaSe^ao-0at /mrfTrore
yeyovevai irpo rfjsrov
rj/jiwv eTTiBrj/jilas Bepia/juov 7rapa7r\tjcri,ov TW ouTt9 dvcrdevri a7ro TGOV %pova)v TOV evayye\iKov
32. 10. ai 5] The repetition of at 5e 33. 5. eTnT-rjdeiovs] Cf . Excerpta exoffended the ear of the scribe of Cod. Theodoto, 46, Kal rots crw/xacrt /card
Venetus, so that he substituted Kal Qvaw e7riT7;5ei6T?7ra eveTrot'^aej', whichai ^e/ for the second al 5. But the also illustrates did TTJVreading of his
exemplaris right. Kal
rrjv ij
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
99/130
THE EXTANT FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON. 87
TOV
34. Ibid. xiii. 46 (R. iv. 256 ; L. n. 87).f O 8e ( HpaK\6a)v TO '0 Gepi'zooN MICGON AAMBANGI
t OepicrTr)v eavTov \eyei, 5 dvaTraveo-Oat, avrov e?r' avrois' TO &e KA'I cyNArei KApnoN
rjcrlv elpr/arOai, rj on TO avva^o^evovalcoviov ecrTiv, rj ort, KOI avTo %&)rj alw-
. d\\d avToOevVOfil^to fiiaiov
elvcuTTJV Sirjyrjcriv CIVTOV,
(f)d(TKOVTO$ TOV ^(DTTJpa MIC00N AAMBANGIN, KCbl dVV^.OVTO^ TOV
10 MICGON Kal TT)V CYNAnJOfHN TOY KApnOY /9 V, aVTIKpVS
fj? Svo Trpdy/jiaTa Trap KIT deny?, cJ?
2 vo/j-lfct] vo/j-lfeLV. 7 TJ 6Vt] ov.
Jo. iv. 36.
eic ZGOHN AICONION
35. Ibid. xiii. 48 (R. IV. 260 ; L. n. 95).
'O Se(
HpaK\ea)v TO IN A 6 cnei'pcoN OMOY XAI 'p^ KAI Gepi'- Jo. iv. 36.
ZOON OVTQ) Sirjyrjo-aTo' Xaipei, pev yap, (frijcriv, 6 aireiptovOTL o~Treipet,, Kal OTI 77877 TLVOL TWV cnrepadTayv avTOv
GwdyeTai, eXTriBa 6%a)v Trjv avTrjv Kal Trepl TOOV5\OL7T(ov' 6 Se OepL^asv oyitota)? TL Kal OepLcret,. aXX* o
IJLGV 7T/5COTO9 rjp^aTO (TTreiptov, o BevTepos OepL^wv.ov yap ev TO> avTw eSvvavTO d^^OTepoL ap^acrOai'eSet ydp TrpwTov (TTrapfjvai,, elff vo~Tepov OepiaOrjvai.Travaa/Aevov fjuevTOiye TOV cnreipovTos cnreipeiv,
34. 7. Delarue's emendation 77 ort
is by no means'
absque causa'
(see
Lommatzsch). Whence Huet derived
o I do not know. It is the readingof no MS. and suits neither grammarnor sense. We must assume that acorruption of or I to ON led to theomission of the 77.
35. 3. 77677] Cod. Venetus has altered
77677 to e?677, but the original reading
is preferable. Different kinds or
classes of seeds are not insistedupon,
nor do they, so far as we know, form
part of the Heracleonic doctrine.
The sowing of this vibs wdpuirov,whoever he was, must refer to the
sowing by a higher power of the
pneumatic seeds in the creatures of
the Demiurge, and the Trveu/xart/cot are
not divided into different classes, so
far as is known. The 77677 is also
forcible. He rejoices in that he is
already gathering in the earnest of
the rest. For a similar confusion
of 77 and ei in Cod. Venetus, cf. Frag.
20, ws Tj'det inffT-qv for u>s 77677
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
100/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
101/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
102/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
103/130
THE EXTANT FRAGMENTS OF HE11ACLEON. 91
39. Ibid. xiii. 52 (R. iv. 267 ; L. n. 108).
'Hpa/cXecov 8e a7r\ovcnepov e/c\a^cov TO OYKSTI AIA THN Jo. iv. 42.
CHN AAAI'AN nicieyoMeN cfrrjo-l Aeijreiv TO fiovrjv' ert jnev yap
TTpOS TO AYTOI fAp AKHKOAM6N, KA*I oTAAMGN OTI OYTO'c 6CTIN
ZooTHp TOY KO'CMOY ^ijaiv Olydp avdpwjroi TO /jue5 V7TO dvOpCUTTCOV oSiyyOV fJiCVOl TCiaTZVOVCri TU>
7rdv Se evTV^wcri rot? Xo^yot? avTOV, OVTOI OVKC
v av6pwTrivY]V /mapTVpiav, d\\d 8t' avTrjvid
40. Ibid. xiii. 59 (R. iv. 274 ; L. n. 123).
TOV ev r&>
Se BACIAIKON 6 '1rlpa/c\ea)v \eyeiv TOV
yov, eirel /cal O-UTO? e(Saai\eve TGOV VTC avTov Bid SeTO jjbiKpdv avTov /cal 7rp6
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
104/130
92 THE EXTANT FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON.
Jo. iv. 54. 'K THC 'loyAAiAC eic THN FAAIAAI'AN dvT\ TOV etc TTJS ovcodevJo. iv. 47. '\ovSa la$. OVK ol8a Se OTTCO? els TO "HiweAAeN AHOGNHCKGIN
KivrjOels oleTai dvaTpeTrecrdai Ta SoyfiaTa TWV VTCOTI-
OefJbevwv dOdvaTov elvai Tr)v ^v^v, et? TO avTo av/jL-Mt. x. 28. (Bd\\e(r6ai vTroXa^dvwv Kal TO Ty)(HN KA'I COOMA AnoAAyc0Ai 15
1 Cor. xv.
53, 54.
Cf. Is. xxv.8.
Jo. iv. 48.
eN reeNNH. /cal OVK dOdvcLTOV 76 elvai fyelrai TT}V6
f
Hyoa/cXea)i/, aXX* e7TtT?;Seta)5 e^ovcrav TT/DO? o-corrjplav,
avrrjv \eya)v elvai To eNAyoMGNON A'^GAPCI'AN (^GAproN,KA) AGANACI'AN GNHTON, oTaz^ KATATT00H d GANATOC avrfjs6IC ISMKOC.
7T/)05TOUTOt? KOL TO 'EAN MH CHM?A KAI
TpATA2O
TAHre oy MH nicreycHTe Xeyea-Oai, fao-lv oliceia>
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
105/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
106/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
107/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
108/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
109/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
110/130
98 THE EXTANT FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON.
(frvcriv avTwv, /cal 7rpoe\e
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
111/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
112/130
100 THE EXTANT FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON.
d yap ravra Kal dva\io~KQVTa ^a\\ov fJTrep CTVVL-
Eph. ii. 3. ardvTa, TTCO? o IlaOXo? tyycri TTOV TO "HiweGA 4>ycei TGKNA o'prfic
d)C KA'I oi Aoinoi' ; r) \eyeTWo~av rj/j,lv co? ov/c ecmv dvaXwrucbvteal /naXicrra KCUT avTov 6opo7roi,bv 77 opyrj, 779 TEKNIA HMG- 35
9
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
113/130
THE EXTANT FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON. 101
48. Ibid. xx. 30 (R. iv. 359 ; L. n. 290).
f O /jbevTOi, ye'HpanXewv
TO "EcTiN 6 ZHTOON KA'I KPINOON Jo. viii. 50.
OVK dvafyepei ejrl TOV Trarepa, roiavra \eycov' '0 ZHTOON KA)
KPI'NOON ecrrlv 6 e/cbi/cwv yite, 6 vTr^perTj^ 6 els TOVTO
TeTayfj,6vo$, 6 MH GIKH THN MA)(AipAN (f>opooN, 6 IKAIKOC Horn, xiii.
5 TOV /3acrfcXe&)9. Mo>cr?79 Se eariv OVTOS, /caOd irpoei-
prj/cev avrois \eV IIco? ovv ov \eyei, THN
10 Kpi'ciN TTACAN TrapaSeBo a Oca avTu>; KOL vofjil^cov \vet,v
rrjv dvOv7ro(j)opdv ravrd (^rjoT KaXcS? \e
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
114/130
102 THE EXTANT FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON.
50. CLEM. ALEX. Strom, iv. 9, p. 595 (ed. Potter).
Cf. Lc. xii.811. e^yov/juevo^ TOV TOTTOV ^pa/cXecov, 6 rrjs Ova\ev-TIVOV cr^oX,^? SoKL/jLcoTdTos, /card \e^iv (frrjcriv 'O /A0\oy Lav
elvai Trjv fiev ev Trj irLcnei ical TroXtreta, rrjv Be ev
a)vfj. 77 fjuev ovv ev a)vfj 6/JLO\oyia /cal eTrl TWV eov-criaiv yiveTai, rjv fjuovrjv, (frrjo-lv, 6fJLO\oyiav rjyovvTai, 5
elvai ol TroXXot, ov% vtyiws. Svvavrai Be TavTtjv TTJV6/jLo\oylav real ol vTrotcpiral ofji>o\o
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
115/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
116/130
ADDITIONAL NOTES.
A. HERACLEON AND VALENTINUS.
The extant Fragments of Valentinus offer some points of comparison with those
of Heracleon, especially with regard to language and terminology, which can be
most conveniently discussed in an Additional Note. I follow the order in which these
Fragments are given in Hilgenfeld's collection (Ketzergeschichte, p. 293), and have
adopted his text where I quote from them. I have also given references to the
pages of Potter's edition of Clement of Alexandria.
1. Clem. Alex. Strom, n. 8, p. 448. Valentinus is speaking of the terror
which came upon the Angels (of the Demiurge) at the utterances of the man whomthey had created (tKelvov rod TrXaV/^aros). These were due to Him who had placedin man the seed of the higher essence (5ta rbv dopdrws tv avry ffirtp[j.a 5e5w/c6ra rrjsavudev oua-i'as). Compare Heracleon's explanation of the 'forty and six years'
(Frag. 16), TT\V ti\r]i> rovrfori rb 7rXacr ) ua...T6 Iv r e/x^wT^ucm 0-rrtp/j.a. Heracleon
has retained the terminology of his master. With the Angels compare Frag. 36, oi
TTJS o'iKOvofjiias cfyyeXot, di
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
117/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
118/130
106 ADDITIONAL NOTES.
not noticed in his digest. But he has either adopted in his text or noticed prac-tically all the variants from Migne's text which are of any value.
Dindorf, vol. in. p. 425 1. 15 /j,era TTJV A rrjs ins. e/c intra lin.
426 1. 10429 1. 11
434 1. 3
436 1. 8
441 1. 19
445 1. 22
450 1. 30
452 1. 20
453 1. 13
453 1. 14
TOU
OuaXe'T4J'taj'o4
oparai
ecrri
6X4701;
rois
(sic)
OuaXevTiviavov
bpare
? corr.
x bpw
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
119/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
120/130
INDEX OF PASSAGES OF SCRIPTURE QUOTED, EX-PLAINED, OR REFERRED TO BY HERACLEON.
The figures refer to the number of the page. Square brackets have been used
where the reference is doubtful.
Gen. vi. 2 93
[Ps. xix. (xviii.) 5 79]Ps. Ixix. (Ixviii.) 10 69
Is. i. 2, 4 93
v. 1, 2 93
[xxv. 8 92]
[Jer. vii. 11 69]
[Ezek. xxxiv. 16 80]
[Mt. iii. 11 101]
Mt. viii. 12 93
ix. 37 86
x. 28 92
xi. 11 58
xxi. 13 69
xxiii. 15, 33 99
xxv. 1 84
[Lc. iii. 16 101]
Lc. vii. 26 65
28..... ,58xii. 8 11 102
xix. 10 80
Jo. i. 3 50, 80
4 53
18 55
20 56
21 56, 58
23 56
25 61
26 f. 62 f.
28 f 65
ii. 12 f. 66 f.
14f. 68 f.
17 69
19f 70f.
iv. 11 84
14 72 f.15. ..73
Jo. iv. 16 73f.
17 7418 f 75
20 f 76
22 78 f.
23 80
24 79,812527 822831 8332-34 8435 86
36 87 f.
37 88
38f 8940 90
42 91
46 91
4749 92
5053 9354 92v. 45 101
viii. 12 ff 95 f.
21 f 95 f.
37 f 97
43 97
44 97,98, 100
47 97
50 101
Eom. i. 25 79
[v. 15 72]vi. 21 , 92
xiii.4 101
1 Cor. x. 5 79
xv. 53 f 92
Gal. iii. 19 89
2Tim.ii. 13 103Heb. ix. 7.. ..68
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
121/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
122/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
123/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
124/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
125/130
TEXTS AND STUDIESCONTKIBUTIONS TO
BIBLICAL AND PATRISTIC LITERATURE
EDITED BY
J. ARMITAGE ROBINSON B.D.FELLOW or CHRIST'S COLLEGE CAMBRIDGE
VOL. I.
THE APOLOGY OF ARISTIDES
THE PASSION OF S. PERPETUATHE LORD'S PRAYER IN THE EARLY CHURCH
THE FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEON
CAMBRIDGEAT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS
1891
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
126/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
127/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
128/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
129/130
-
8/6/2019 Booke. The fragments of Heracleon. 1891.
130/130