Journal of Semitic Studies 36.2, 1991

Journal of Semitic Studies XXXVI/2 Autumn 1991

NEMESIANA SYRIACA :NEW FRAGMENTS

FROM THE MISSING SYRIAC VERSIONOF THE DE NATURA HOMINIS

MAURO ZONTA

PAVIA

I. Prefatory Remarks

The De Natura Hominis [ = DNH] is the only known work ofNemesius, bishop of Emesa. In this renowned patristic Greektreatise, the author, drawing on a wide reading of both classicaland Christian texts, deals with the major problems of anthropo-logy and psychology. From internal evidence it can be inferredthat the DNH was written in the last decade of the fourthcentury, but it only began to attract attention from the secondhalf of the seventh century onwards. From then on its famespread quickly, and it was translated into the major eastern andwestern languages. As a result it was read, quoted and used byGreek, Latin, Syriac, Arabic and Armenian philosophers andtheologians, and so became one of the main channels for thetransmission of ancient thought to the middle ages1.

Recently, the DNH has attracted scholarly attention onceagain. Many studies have appeared which investigate Neme-sius' teachings2. Many others have been devoted to the exactreconstruction of the DHN's text. Among the latter, Moreno

1 For a general bibliography on the DNH and its fate, see M. Geerard,Clavis Patrum Graecorum, II (Turnhout 1974), 282-83, note 3550. On thetranslations of the DNH in particular, see H. Brown Wicher, Catalogustranslationum et commentariorum, VI (Washington 1986), 32-72 (s.v. NemesiusEmesenus). See also the list of works employed or quoted by Morani in hisedition of the DNH (below, note 3), pp. xvi-xvii.

2 See A. Siclari, 'L'antropologia di Nemesio di Emesa nella criticamoderna', Aevum 47 (1973), 477-97; idem, L.'antropologia di Nemesio di Emesa(Padova 1974); G. Verbeke and J. R. Moncho (eds.), Nemesius d'Emese, Denatura ho minis: Traduction de Burgundio de Pise, avec une introduction sur tanthropo-logie de Nemesius (Leiden 1975); A. Kallis, Der Mensch im Kosmos. DasWeltbild Nemesios' von Emesa (Miinster 1978).

223

at Hum

boldt-Universitaet zu B

erlin on June 27, 2012http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/

Dow

nloaded from

http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/

NEMESIANA SYRIACA

Morani's writings hold pride of place, in particular his book Latradi^ione manoscritta del 'De natura hominis' di Nemesio (Milano1981). This work contains the most detailed examination evermade of the DNH's textual tradition, both direct and indirect,and so provides a prolegomenon to Morani's critical edition ofNemesius' work, published some years ago in the BibliothecaTeubneriana^. This much-needed reliable edition totally replacesthe edition of Matthaei (dating back to 1802)4. A great numberof Greek mss of the DNH are extant (nearly 150). From theseMorani chose for his edition the most ancient witnesses, fromwhich the other mss are descended. Special consideration wasalso given to the oldest translations of Nemesius' work.

As to these key witnesses, the stemma codicum suggested byMorani is as follows5:

7th cent.

8th cent.

9th cent.

10th cent.

11 th cent.

3 Nemesius, De natura hominis, ed. M. Morani (Bibliotheca ScriptorumGraecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana; Leipzig 1987). A bibliography ofall the recent contributions to the textual criticism of Nemesius is to befound in M. Morani, 'La versione armena del trattato Flepi <puaeax; avOptoTtoudi Nemesio di Emesa', Memorie dell'Istituto hombardo, Classe di Lettere 31(1970). ioj-9-

4 C. F. Matthaei, Nemesii, De natura hominis graece et latine (PG XL, 503-817; Halae Magdeburgicae 1802).

5 Conspectus siglorum: Max: quotations from the DNH by Maximus the

224

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

As can easily be seen, contamination is the most characteristicfeature of the DNH's textual tradition. In particular, ms K,which Morani carefully studied6, appears to have been affectedby extensive contamination from different branches of thetradition, so that 'every reading of it, although not confirmedby other mss, may come from an ancient tradition'7. The Syriactranslation, too, seems to play an important role. Owing to itsspecial position in the stemma, this version appears to be theonly witness of a branch which separated from the rest of thetradition very early (maybe in the seventh century)8, so that,according to a strict Lachmannian view, as much weight in thechoice of textual variants is to be given to the now lost branch,represented by the Syriac version, as to all the other witnesses9.

II. The Syriac Version

The first sign of the existence of a Syriac translation of theDNH occurs in a letter (Ep. 43) of the Nestorian katholikosTimotheus I (second half of the eight century), in which hewrote to his correspondent, Rabban Mar Petion:

Seek also for the proposition of a certain philosopher who is namedNemesius, which is about the ordinance of man, and its beginning is: 'Manis very beautifully fashioned from a spiritual soul and a body'. And hecompleted this in five sections, more or less, and promised to take upconcerning the soul. But this second one does not exist10.

Confessor; Dam: quotations from the DNH in the De fide orthodoxa of Johnof Damascus; syr: Syriac version (fragments); arm: Armenian version;arab: Arabic version/s; FI: ms in Patmos, St. John's monastery, 202 (10thcent.); K: ms in Rome, Vat. Ap. Libr., Chig. R. IV. 13 (ioth-nth cent.);H: ms in London, Brit. Libr., Harleianus 5685 (nth-izth cent.); Alf: Latinversion by Alfanus (nth cent.).

6 'II manoscritto chigiano di Nemesio', Kendiconti dell'lstituto Lombardo,Classe di Lettere 105 (1971), 621-55.

7 See Morani, II manoscritto chigiano, 635: 'K e stato ... con mss. moltoantichi; pertanto ogni leîone di K, anche se non confermata da altri codici, pudprovenire da tradiîone antica [emphasis ours], e potra essere eliminata, solo inbase a criteri interni'.

8 See Morani, La tradiîone manoscritta, 204-12.9 Cf. M. Morani, 'La traduzione armena di Nemesio di Emesa. Problemi

linguistici e filologici', in G. Fiaccadori (ed.), Autori classics in lingue delVicino e Medio Oriente (Roma 1990), 31.

10 This English translation by R. A. Henshaw of the Syriac text of theletter is reproduced in Wicher Brown, Catalogus, 37. We were not able tosee the original text, edited by O. Braun, 'Briefe des Katholikos Timotheos

225

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

From this brief mention, one can argue for the existence of atleast one Syriac translation of the DNH in Timotheus' time, itsfirst chapter being separate from the rest of the work.

Further evidence for the existence of such a version may befound in two marginal references in the Armenian translation11.They deal with two variant readings which the translator notedin the Syriac text of the DNH, and are the only witnesses ofthis version employed by Morani for his critical edition.However, the fact that in the Armenian version Nemesius'work is clearly ascribed to Gregory of Nyssa leads one tosuppose the existence of two Syriac translations of this work,one of them being pseudepigraphic and the other indicating thecorrect authorship12. Unfortunately, full confirmation of thissupposition cannot be given, because of the total lack of Syriacmss of the complete text of the DNH. The only survivingfragments hitherto known are those included in a psychologicaltreatise (De animd) by Mose bar Kepha, a Monophysite bishopof Mosul, who died at nearly ninety in 90313.

This De anima is preserved only — as far as we know — inthe ms now kept in Rome, Vat. Ap. Libr., vat. syr. 147, fols 3a-92b (copied in 1234). The text, still unpublished, was translatedinto German by O. Braun14. In chapters 3 and 4 of this work,some short sentences from the second chapter of the DNH areincorporated, but Nemesius is never explicitly named. Theparallel passages are as follows:

I', Oriens Cbristianus 2 (1911), 8-11; cf. R. J. Bidawid, Les lettres dupatriarchsnestorien Timothee I (Studi e testi 187; Citta del Vaticano 1956), 35.

11 On these references, see A. Zanolli, 'Sur une ancienne traductionsyriaque du Oepi y'jazmc, <xv6pci>7rou de Nemesius', Revue de I'Orient Chretien20 (1915-1917), 331-33; cf. Morani, La versione armena, 118.

12 Such a supposition was made by Morani in 'La tradi^ione manoscritta,

98-9-13 See M. Le Quien, Oriens Christianas in quatuor Patriarchatus digestus

(Parisiis 1740), II, cols 1575-78; cf. J. S. Assemani, Bibliotheca Orientalis (4 vols.;Romae 1719-1728), II, 218-19.

14 O. Braun, Moses Bar Kepha und sein Buch von der Seek (Freiburg imBreisgau 1891), 26-132; cf. G. Graf, GCAL II, 230.

226

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

De anima De natura hominis

M = Braun's translationV = Vatican ms DNH = Morani's editionM 40,23-41,1 (V nb-i2a) D N H 26,10-16M 42,10-14 (V 13b) D N H 32,20-33,1M 42,21-25 (V 14a) D N H 20,14-17M 42,26-43,3 (V 14a) D N H 21,4-9M 43,4-7 (V I4a-i4b) D N H 21,24-22,3M 43,12-25 (V i4b-ija) D N H 22,3-16M 44,1-6 (V â-ijb) D N H 18,22-19,2M 44,29-35 (V 16a) D N H 20,3-9M45,8ff(V 16b) D N H 19,7ft"

These correspondences, indeed, are not, as a rule, literary ones,according to what can be inferred from Braun's translation15.

Moreover, it is worth noticing that chapters 2 and 3 of theDNH, which are devoted to a special study of the nature of thesoul and its union with the body, were circulated separately.They were ascribed to Gregory of Nyssa under the title Ileplij/ux?)?16 and employed by the unknown author of the A6yo<;x£cpaXat(oS7)<; 7repi i>ux?iQ 7rpo<; Tartavov17. Now the scheme forthe definition of the soul proposed in this work, well-knownalso among the Syrians and the Arabs18, is closely similar to,though not identical with, that in Mose's De anima: cf. pseudo-Gregory [= ps-G], chap. 2 ('whether the soul exists') withMose's [= M], chap. 2 ('welches beweist, daft es eine Seelegibt'); ps-G chap. 3 ('whether the soul is a substance') with Mchap. 5; ps-G chap. 4 ('whether the soul is incorporeal') with

15 See also Morani, lâ tradiîone manoseritta, 100. About the relationshipbetween MoSe and Nemesius, see G. Klinge, 'Die Bedeutung der syrischenTheologen als Vermittler der griechischen Philosophic an der Islam',Zeitscbrift fiir Kirchengeschichte III, 9 (1939), 363-72.

16 See PG XLV, 188-221.17 This work was commonly attributed to pseudo-Gregory Thaumatur-

gus (see PG X, 1137-1146); cf. S. P. Brock, 'Clavis Patrum Graecorum III,•nifjTS 32 (1981), 176-78.

18 A compendious Syriac version was published by G. Furlani in JAOS35 (l91))> 297-3!7- F° r a n e v e n more abridged and altered Arabic version,see Furlani, 'Pseudo-Aristotele ff-1-nafs', Kendiconti R. Ace. Lincei V, 24(1915), 117-37. Both versions were ascribed to Aristotle; another Arabicversion, derived from the Syriac and attributed to Avicenna, was recentlyedited by H. Gatje {Studien %ur Vberlieferung der Aristotelischen Psychologie imIslam [Heidelberg 1971], 95-113).

227

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

M chap. 6; ps-G chap. 5 ('whether the soul is simple') with Mchap. 7; ps-G chap. 6 ('whether the soul is immortal') with Mchap. 16; ps-G chap. 7 ('whether the soul is rational') with Mchap. 11.

The search for other quotations of Nemesius in Syriacauthors has failed to achieve any significant results. Such is thecase, for example, with the Kitdbd dsimdtd (Book of treasures) ofJob of Edessa (d. 835). This work, edited and translated intoEnglish by A. Mingana19, contains answers to a large numberof questions about physics and metaphysics, often from anexoteric point of view. P. Kraus, in his well-known essay onJabir ibn Hayyan, was able to discover a community of sourcematerial between the Book of Treasures and the Kitdb sirr al-haliqa (Book of the Secret of Creation), ascribed to Ballnus (i.e.pseudo-Apollonius)20. It has been recently pointed out by U.Weisser, in her edition of recension B of the Sirr al-haltqa, thata large portion of this book is simply a paraphrasic version ofthirty chapters from the DNH21. Unfortunately, no parallels tothis paraphrase can be found in Job of Edessa's work22, so thatit cannot be firmly demonstrated that this Syriac writer knewNemesius23.

19 A. Mingana (ed.), An Encyclopaedia of Philosophical and Natural Sciencesas taught in Baghdad about A. D. 817, or Book of Treasures by Job of Odessa(Cambr idge 1935). As to the sources of this book , see B. Lewin , ' J o bd 'Edesse et son Livre des Treso r s ' , Orientalia Suecana 6 (1957), 21-30.

20 P . Kraus , ' J ab i r et la science g recque ' , Memoires pre'sentes a I'Instituta"Egypte 45 (1942) [ = Paris 1986], 174-75, and, particularly, 276-78 (containinga compar ison of passages from bo th b o o k s ) ; see also U. Weisser (ed.), Buchiiber das Geheimnis der Schbpfung und die Darstellung der Natur ... von Pseudo-Apollonios von Tyana ( A l e p p o 1979), X and 6.

21 Weisser , Buch iiber das Geheimnis, 22 ff. [ G e r m a n sec t ion] .22 Pace, a m o n g t he o t h e r s , Wiche r B r o w n , Catalogus, p . 38 : ' . . . the

Syrian Job of Edessa ... incorporated passages from Nemesius, withoutnaming him, in his Ketaba de Simata ...'. See also p. 248 below.

23 For pseudo-Apollonius' and other Arabic versions of the DNH, adetailed study by Kh. Samir is now available: 'Les versions arabes deNemesius de Horns', in M. Pavan and U. Cozzoli (eds.), L'eredita classicanelle lingue orientali (Roma 1986), 99-151. This matter has been recently dealtwith by Samir in a report ('Nouvelle contribution a l'etude du Nemesiusarabe') presented to the international seminar Testi medici greci in versioniorientali (Naples, Nov., 6th-8th, 1990), in which some interesting remarksabout the Arabic philosophical lexicon of these versions were made.

228

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

Finally, an explicit quotation of Nemesius is reported inMose's De paradiso (chap. XX), but this reference cannot betraced in DNH's current text24.

III. The New Fragments

A hitherto neglected aid to the reconstruction of the Syriacversion of Nemesius is found in another psychological treatise,the De anima of Iwannls of Dara. Iwannls of Dara was aMonophysite bishop, perhaps belonging to the generationbefore Mose bar Kepha25. The only evidence as to his dateoccurs in a sentence in Bar Hebraeus' Chronicon Syriacum26,from which one can deduce that he was alive in the year 837,and was on good terms with the renowned historian Dionysiusof Tell-Mahre27.

Iwannls' main works have not been much studied yet (onlyone of them has been edited in toto28), although their titles havelong been known29. However, as A. Voobus has shown30,Iwannls was a writer of no small importance for the history ofSyriac culture and literature under the Abbasids31. The fieldwith which he deals ranges from liturgy to theology and

24 Cf. A s s e m a n i , Bibliotbeca Orientalis, I I , 129; see a l so t h e L a t i n t r a n s -lation by A. Maes [Masius] (Anversa 1569), according to its reprint inMigne, PG CXI, 481-608; 507D-508A. The Syriac text of this work is stillunpublished. A partially abridged Italian version of chaps. 19-28, derivedfrom the Latin one, is to be found in B. Chiesa, 'Gen. 2,15-3,24 nella piuantica esegesi giudeo-araba', Atti delta VI Settimana di Studi 'Sangue eantropologia nella teologia' (Roma 1989), 1079-95.

25 See A . B a u m s t a r k , Geschichte der syrischen Literatur ( B o n n 1922), 2 7 7 ;A . B a r s a u m , Histoire des sciences et de la litterature syriaque [in A r a b i c ] ( G l a n e /Losser [Holland] 1987), 343-44; cf. G. Graf, GCAL II, 233.

26 T h i s sen tence is q u o t e d by Asseman i , Bibliotheca Orientalis, I I , 219; cf.also Le Q u i e n , Oriens Christianus, I I , cols 1429-30.

27 Barsaum, {Histoire, 343) places Iwannls' floruit about 860; R. Duval{La litterature syriaque [Paris 1907 = Amsterdam 1970]), at the beginning ofthe 9th century (p. 315).

28 It is De oblatione, edited by J. Sader (Louvain 1970) [CSCO, Scr. SyriCXXXII]).

29 See e .g . Bibliotbeca Orientalis, I I , 118-22.30 'Important Manuscript Discoveries on Iwannls of Dara and his

Literary Heritage', JAOS 96 (1976), 576-78, where a detailed list of theknown works of this author is given.

31 Voobus, 'Important Manuscript', 576: 'He occupies a very importantplace in the history of intellectual culture in the 9th century in the lands ofthe Euphrates and Tigris'.

229

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMES1ANA SYRIACA

biblical exegesis. His exegetical writings appear to be the chiefsource for the works of M6§e32, who was widely knownamong Syrians and Arabs.

According to the results of Voobus' study, the De anima isthe only work of Iwannis mainly concerned with philosophicalproblems, such as the division of the faculties of the soul, thevarious processes of the senses and the intellect, and so on.From the fifth to the ninth centuries an extensive literature onthese themes flourished among the Syrians33. Unfortunately,we are able to identify hardly any of its Greek sources. Thusthe discovery in Iwannis' text of some passages directly takenfrom the DNH will be of great importance for the study of therelationship between Syriac and Greek thought.

It is regrettable that the De anima is known now only fromthe fragments collected by an anonymous compiler in fols 133a-154a of ms vat. syr. 14734. These fragments were translated intoItalian (but not published) by Giuseppe Furlani in a 1928article on 'La psicologia di Giovanni di Dara'35. In his transla-tion, Furlani included some chapters (found on fols 15 4a-168bof the Vatican ms), devoted to psychological matters, butapparently not belonging to Iwannis' work36. However, Fur-lani tentatively ascribed them to Iwannis, chiefly on stylisticgrounds.

32 See A. Voobus, Discovery of the Exegetical Works of Mole bar Kephd: TheUnearthing of Very Important Sources for the Exegesis and History of the NewTestament Text (Stockholm 1973), 27 ff. For an up-to-date bibliography ofMose bar Kepha's exegetical works, see Chiesa, 'Gen. 2,15-3,24', 1076-77.

33 See a brief survey in G. Furlani, 'La psicologia di Ahudhemmeh',Atti delFAcc. delle Science di Torino 61 (1926), 837 fF.

34 However, the discovery of new witnesses of this writing was announcedby Voobus in 'Important Manuscript Discoveries', 577 n. 13: they areMosul, Orth. O ; Harvard, Har. 35; AtSaneh m . Barsaum, Histoire, 344,refers to the existence of another ms in the Boston Library, n. 3973(seemingly containing the first four chapters only). This and the second ofthe above-listed mss are the same ms as n. 47 of M. H. Goshen-Gottstein'scatalogue (Syriac Manuscripts in the Harvard College Library: A Catalogue,Harvard Semitic Studies 23; Missoula 1979, 56-57 [see also S. Brock's reviewin JSS 26 (1981), 317-21]): at fols. 48-533, this ms contains a part of thechapters (from 4th to 10th) of Iwannis' De anima.

35 RSO 11 (1926-1928), 254-79.36 A c c o r d i n g t o the copyist , t h e excerpta o f the De anima end o n fol.

154a, w h e r e this c o l o p h o n is w r i t t e n : Shlem mimra d'al napld da'bid ImaryIwannis dDdra mdinta.

230

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMES1ANA SYR1ACA

The longest passages hitherto identified of the Syriac versionof the DNH occur in both the first and the second section ofthis part of the ms. This fact, indeed, escaped Furlani's atten-tion37. Because these passages are fragments of an essentiallyliteral version, their philological and linguistic examination willcertainly lead not only to a deeper knowledge of the DNH'shistory and textual criticism, but also to a more exact definitionof Syriac philosophical terminology. For this reason, the text ofthese fragments is transcribed below, together with the Greekoriginal.

IV. The Text

SIGLA: G = ms vat. syr. 147; N = Nemesius, DNH,according to Morani's edition; [...] = words or letters to bedeleted, and (...) = words or letters to be inserted, accordingto our conjectures. Words or letters resulting from an emenda-tion of the manuscript text are underlined. We have suggestedthese tentative emendations in order to reconstruct the readingsof the translation of the DNH, rather than to restore the text ofIwannls' work. Justification for the emendations will be foundin the Notes on the Text following the transcription. Abbrevia-tions have been written out in extenso, except en (= id est) andthe chronograms. We have added the seydme in accordance withthe Greek text. Diacritical signs in the ms were not considered.

Fragments 1-3 are ascribed by the compiler to the 3rd nimraof the first chapter of Iwannls' work: see fol. 135a, 10-11.

1. N 1,3 = G I35ai8-i3jbi:

Tov av0pa)7rov ex vyrf, voepa<;xai ad)(iaTO<; apiaxa

2. N 1,5-1,8 = G 13jbi-6:

ex T O U 8e voepav r Jruj5rvi.ox..i

XeyeaOou TT

37 See 'La psicologia di Giovanni', 255-56; cf. Furlani, La psicologia diAbudbemmeh, 841, where he states: ' . . . una terza divisione [scil. of facultiesof the soul], della quale non so rintracciare la fonte, leggiamo nel f. 154a [ofthe Vatican ms]'.

231

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

TOXEpOV 7TpOCTeX0WV 6 VOU?

5 XT) 4*UZ7) ^ &XXo<; aXXy) .=>\o&\r^voepav aur/jv ETOITJCJEVT) TO voepov acp'eau-riji;

3. N 1,9-2,3 = G 135b6- i3638:

zivkc, jxev a>v eaxi xal IIXCOTIVOI;

aXXvjv elvai

T7)V <|/UX''1V X a ^ * ^ o v T ° v VOUV r^JOCTJ OOJ

5 i x xpicov TOV av6pa>7rovaruvecfxavat (iouXovxai

xal (l11*/^? x a^ VO'J r 6 o m oYjae xai 'A7roXtvapio<; a>c^\xA<\^

6 xyji; AaoSixeiat; rtfocnn om

xouxov yapxov OefxeXtov ir^c, tSia<; SO^YJI; cnL.ixai xa Xou p p S 6 ( ) Axaxa xo oixelov S6y(i.a mL.i

15 xtvec; SE OU Si£<TxeiXav c^x.-va

aXXa xyjt; oucia<;7)y£[JLOVlx6v

XO VOEpOV

20 'ApiaxoxEXyji; SE ^..I ""- W,""-•'•*'XOV (XEV 8uva(Z£t VOUV rdluiL=>.A OOJ

auyxaxacTXEuaaSai xa>xov Se EV£py£ia OupaOsv 7)(£7C£t(Tt,EVai ^ ^ ^ ^

25 oux zic, xo slvat reVscn&x.T ,m Vo l cvl.ioxai xrjv U7rap^iv cni\^(o) ai^J^r^xou av0pa)7iou ouvxeXouvxa aXX' p^lr^ r^lsuLsn f<xi\=.-\

fjS XWV <pi)CTlXCOV

xal 0£capia<;30 CTU(i.PaXX6(X£V0V

XO{JLI8^ youvoXiyoix; xcov av0pa)7rtov

232

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

xai (jtovoix; xoix; cptXoao<p7)<iavxa<;

x6v EVEpysia vouv E/EIV

35 8ta|i£(3aiouxat

riXaxcov 8E OU SOXEI XsyEtv

xov av0pto7iov slvat

xo auva(xcp6xEpov

40 aXXa 4/uX''lv

<rco(jtaxi xotcoSs

4. N 55,9-10 = G 154a:

<J>avxaaxtx6v ji.ev ouv !

aXoyou

TfQ aXo

Sia TWV ato0Y)T7)ptcov evepyouaa

5. N 55,11-12 = G 154a:

Si eaxt 7ra0o<;

aXoyou ^ X ^ ?

U7ro cpavxaaTOu TIVOI; yivojxevov

6. N 55,17-18 = G 154a:

ox; yap EV xoT<; aiCT0y]TY)pioi<;

eyytvexai 7ra0o<;

oxav ataOavexai

ouxa) xa i ev xrj

£VVO7)CT7)

7. N 68,6-9 = G 154a:

xou SE 8iavo7)xixou EIOI

y£vixto<; fiEv at XE

xai ai ouyxaxa0£oei<;

xai a7ro<puyai xai 6

Ei8ixco<; SE at XE VOYJOEK;

xciv ovxcov xat at apsxat

xai at

rdrSu

'i=J

rtfocn

'•in

rdlitn

x a i ?&v XE^VCOV ot Xoyot

233

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


XO E7U0UfZ7)XlXOV

Siaips'txat eiQ 8uo

EI<; 7)Sova<; xa i Xu7T

rj £7U0ufiia

auoxuyxavouCTa ot

io. N 76,6-10 =

Taiv TJSOVCOV

a t fxev £toi <\)\J%IY.<X.'[

at 8E ocofxaxtxat^ux^xai fisv at x^<;

a?1 yap

XU7T/)V

G 154b:

5 )

d)? ai Tcepl xa (i.a67j(i.aTaxai TY]V 6stoptavauxai yap xai al xoiauxai

etoi XY)

10 CTcofiaxtxal Ss EICTIV

at fi£xa xoivcovtat; xou <ra)(jiaxoi;

xa t X7)<; ^ U X ^ ytv6(i.Evai

xai 81a xouxooco(i.axtxal xaXou[i.svat

15 ax; at 7ispl xkc, xpotpa?xai xa<; auvouata<;

NEMESIANA SYRIACA

8. N 68,15-18 = G 154a:

T6 &E fXVTJptOVEUXtXOV £O"Xl

(jLvy)[zy)<; xa t

atxtov xs xai xajxis'tovECTXl 8 E [i.VY)(J.VJ

s a)?cpavxaata Ea7TO xivoi;

xyji; xax'svspyEtav cpaivo[i.EV7)<;

ox; SE IlXaxcov crA10 CTcoxTjpta aiaOyjoeax; xe

xai

9. N 75,9-11 = G 154b:

CUT

-»)

I en

234

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

i i . N 76,10-12 = G 15531-3:

(JLOVOU 8 1 XOU G&y.tXTOC, ,C7]O.1CluA

oux ocv eupoi xt<; iSia*; Y)8ova<;aXXa 7ia0Y)olov TO(xa? xai peuaeu;

5 xai xa? xaxa xpaatv 7rai6x7)xa<;

12. N 76,14-77,7 = G 15 5a3

ucp'exepov yapxai exepov yevo? etatva)<; at <T7Tou8a'tat vjSovalxai at (pauXai

5 xai at fjtev êi»8er<;at 8e aXyjOeTt;xat at (zev Tf\c, Stavoia^ fi.6v7)<;

at 8e10 xar'attrSirjatv

xat auTcov 8eat (xev etcrt <puatxatat 8e ouxat T7) (xev 7)8ovY) T?) ev TCO Ttivetv

15 avrixetrat 7) ev ftp Stijyrjv XUTCT) rdA=cuia>r^ 8e xaxa Oecoptav ouSevTauxa ouv 7ravxa SetxvuatT7)V YjSoVYJV 6(jtCOVU(XOV

Tcov 8e ca)(xaTtxaiv20 xaXoufjtevarv Y]8ov6iv

at (i.ev etatv avayxaTatxat cpuatxat

ax; at xpotpat at25 rrji; ev8eta<; ava7rX7)ptoxtxal

xai xa evSufiaxa avayxaTaat 8e cpuatxal (xevOIJX avayxaTat 8e

w<; at xaxa cpuaiv ^ y30 xai xaxa V6(JLOV jxtêti; rda> cv=»u=o

ai5xat yap et<; jxev XTJV 8ta(i.ov7)v rî\cuii\^xou TCavxot; yevout; auvxeXoucii v .rw«»>Suvaxov 8e xai X^pU auxaiv CTUSQ Y

2 3 5

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

EV 7iap6eviaai 8e OUTE avayxafai

OUTE cpuaixai

6ic, 7) (X£07) xai Y) Xayvsiaxai ai 7rXv)CT(xoval

40 OUTE yap tic,

TOU ysvoui;&>q 7) xaTa v6(zov auvoualaOUTE tic, auCTTaatv TT\C,

aXXa xai 7rpoa{3Xa7iTouat.45 T(p TOIVUV x a T a 0EOV £(OVTl rû i r^crArtfjaA A.-vrr. OCTJ

(JLOVa? [XETaSlCOXTEOV

Ta<; <xvayxaia<;ajxa xai cpuaixat; 7)8ova<;xio 8E (IET'EXETVOV

50 EV SEUTEpa TOC EL

T(OV apETCOV TETay(i.EVO)

TIXUTOLC, TE xai TOC? cpuaixat;

[JLEV oux avayxaia? 8s JXETITEOV

(JLETa TOU TCpOO"7)XOVTO<; X a i TpO7TOU

5 5 xai (XETpou xai xaipouxai TO7rou

^£ aXXai? CpEUXTEOV r ^ l l l ^ s r^KilVur^ ^..1 Âcn 2>9

3 . H OCTJ.l

13. N 73,1-13 = G i j 6 a i - i 5 6 b 2 :

Flspi TOU aXoyou[XEpOU^ 7] EtoOU^ i ^ WQL\ r*^\ «\*^\ rg V

o xai 7ia07)Tixov iûzu ^r^.i OCTJxai opsxTixov xaXstTai

5 TIVE<; xaO'saur/jv Elvat crL.k^rf th\oXsyouCTi T7)v aXoytav ai.JrurC rî\cvL\s>s rdl(I)? aXoyov d'UYTiv oijcrav —xai ou [i.£poi; r/ji; Xoyoaji; r^ÂAsa.i rîuso cAo7rpcoTOv (JL£V OTI xai xaG'sauTTjv trAo

io EV zoic, aXoyoii; ^cooit;ElipitTXETai £^ OU 8T]X0V

OTl TEXEia TIC, ECTTl

x a i ou |XEpo<; aXX7)<; rîxiMri'A I ^ J M S U C A O

E ! 0 ' 6 T I TCOV aTOTCCOTlXTOOV ECTTi

236

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

15 T?)<; Xoyuajt; |xepo<;elvai TO aXoyov'ApiaxoxeXY)!; Ssxal \iipoc, elvai Xsyeixal Suvafiiv

20 xal SiaipsT dc, Suo<b? ecpafievxaXeixat SE xauraxoivaii; xal opsxxixovTOUTOU Be ECTTI xal

yapax; EOTIV

yap xa Qcoa9 \ \ AS C \

cm X7jv xao opfryjv

30 axxEt xivyjcriv

xou SE aXoyou r ^ c v l A s a rt\ ,£*> ^n am

xo (xev ou 7iei0exai Xoyco

xo SE £7rtTCEi0ei; ECTXI Xoyco

7raXt.v Se xo E7ii7Tei0£<; Xoyco

55 SiaipeTxai elc, Siio

et<; x£ xo £7n0u(X7)xtx6v

xa l x6 0u(x.i,x6v

ECTXI SE opyava

xou fi.Ev £7U0u[ry)xixou

40 xou St'atcfO^crecot; xo ^ a p

xou SE 0u(xixou Y) xapSia

14. N 73,18-20 = G 1;

ecm SE xal xauxa xaauaxaxixa vfjc, coco8ou<; oucftaq

aveu yap xoiixcov oux Ecrxtcrucrx^vai XTJV ^corjv

15. N 74,3-9 = G i 5 6 b j - i 6 :

xcov SE i^uxtxcov 7ia0cov opo<;ouxo<; cucnTOX0O<; saxl xivrjoii;XT]C; 6p£xxix% SuvajjLsco<;

5 aicrOyjxTj E7rl ^avxacrta

237

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

ayaGou

10 x a i aXXco^ TZOLQOC, s a x i

XIVYJCTK; aXoyoi ; XT)<; J

8Cuiz6'kv)<\jiv xaXou vj xaxou

TO 81 yEVlXOV

ouxco<; o p ^

i) 7ra8o<; ecrrl XIVTJCTK;

ev exEpai e£ exepou

evepyeia Si eaxt

XIVYJCTK; SpacrrixY)

Spaaxixov Se XEyexat

20 TO kZ, eauTou xivoujzevov . .\&\&v»> o u » ocn.i ocn

ouxax; o5v xa t 6 6U(JLO<;

eaxt xou 0u(j.oei8ou<;

v.In the following notes on the fragments edited above, we omitall the variants concerning the use of particles (isv, 8e, yap, youvetc., since they are not uniformly reproduced in Syriac texts38.

1. The only remarkable textual feature is the omission ofapioxa (1. 2), common to G and the Latin translation of theDNH by Alfanus (1015-1085).2. More interesting remarks can be made about fragment 2:the reading ... .i ,_.* A\7s» (1. 1), besides showing a possibleagreement with K (EX SE XOU), proves the Syriac translator wasable to understand the causal sense of the first sentence:'because of calling the soul "intelligent"...'.

The phrase ^u«iA rtfotn r£i*\*> (1. 3) seems to be a translationof a|j.cfH(3oXtav 'iypvTzc,. This reading was suggested by Morani in197939, in order to avoid the difficult genitive locution EX XOU... EXOVXO?, but it was later rejected in his critical edition of theDNH. Morani's conjecture was corroborated by the witness of

38 Cf. the observations of H. J. Drossaart Lulofs, in his edition ofNicolaus Damascenus, On the Philosophy of Aristotle, Fragments of the First FiveBooks translated from the Syriac (Le iden 1969), 92 .

39 ' N o t e cr i t iche al t es to di N e m e s i o ' , Wiener Studien n . s . 13 (1979) , 203-4.

238

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

Alfanus alone {ex eo quod ... dubitationem habent). Now thisprobably correct reading can be dated back to at least z 5 o yearsearlier.

A good example of the translation technique adopted is thestrictly literal rendering of 7rax£pov (1. 4) by ^.ou» r?\.rt,introducing the first part of a disjunctive-interrogative clause.This close rendering misled Furlani into translating this locu-tion 'which of them'40.3. The Syriac text needs some emendation:(1) A«r (1. 4) is to be omitted. (2) The manuscript reading m)e^(1. 26) needs a n>an> before it: see the Greek text (xod TTJV

uracp£iv)41. (3) At 1. 29, the ms has oa Soc fcv.t, which we havecorrected to auSoc^Ao. As in many other cases, it seems morereasonable to assume the omission of rvaw in the Syriac text,rather than the insertion of xou in the Greek. Perhaps this error, aswell as the previous one, was already to be found in the Syriacversion employed by Iwannls, for both are reproduced in anidentical passage of Mose bar Kepha's De Anima*2.

As we can see by comparing the Syriac text with its Greeksource, the only significant variant is shown by the reading>«'••' (1. 29): this word translates cputrecov (as written in K),instead of cpumxcov (as in the edited text).

Finally, the passage 3,31-41 was clearly altered, possibly byIwannls, in order to abridge it. The Greek locution TO auvaiicpo-TEpov was translated into Syriac by means of a simple translitera-tion, but its meaning was further explained with the words, ocn,H&\ Xotu i , 'union of both' (lines 38-39)43.4. A quite remarkable feature of this fragment is the addition ofthe gloss rpic, XsyETai xal cuaQviaic, after 4*UX*)? 0- 2 ) : i* ^s commonto G and K, as well as to the quotation of this passage in John ofDamascus' Defide orthodoxa (PG XCIV, 933B8); where this glossis placed after evEpyouaa.6. It is worth noticing the insertion of r <M tfe\&v=» nL.o<n ( =Eyyivexai XIVTJCK;) at 1. 5. It seems to us that this phrase was

40 ' Q u a l e d i l o r o ' : see F u r l a n i , La pskologia di Giovanni, 258, 1. 27-8.41 F o r t h e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e y a t a = XXKO.^Q.C,, see G . F u r l a n i , ' L a logica de l

Libro dei Dialoghi di Severo bar Sakko, Atti 1st. Veneto di Sc. e Lett. 86(1927), 344 n. 130 (referring to p. 321, last line).

42 For another possible interpretation of this concordance betweenIwannls and Mole, see p. 245 below.

43 Similar gloss-insertions are to be found in Hunain's Arabic translationof Nemesius: see Morani, La tradi^ione manoscritta, 93.

239

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

interpolated to stress the parallelism between the two Greeksentences: as perception causes a passion in the senses, sointellection causes a motion** in the soul.

The etymological rendering of oxav (ors + av45) by ... .t rtsaconfirms the literal translation technique, although the conditionalforce assumed by av + conjunctive in Greek is not expressed atall 4<\7. Some textual remarks need to be made about this fragment:

(1) Many words extant in the Greek text were omitted, perhapsby Iwannis himself, such as yevixux; (AEV at 1. 2 (this omission maybe a copyist's error, for yevixco<; fiiv is picked up at 1. 5 by eiSix&c;81)47, xai aTOxpuyat (1. 4), xai ai aperai (1. 6), and 01 Xoyoi (1. 8).

(2) G and a part of the direct tradition agree on three variants:T5J<; 7rpa£e(o<;, added to opjAoci at 1. 4 (as in K); the reading i8ixoi<; forEI8IXCO<; (1. 5), this latter being common to all the most ancientGreek mss, FI excluded48; and VOTJTCOV instead of ovxcov (1. 6), theantiquity and wide diffusion of which in the stemma is nowconfirmed by Iwannis' witness. In fact, this variant is shared notonly by K, A [ms Munich, gr. 562], and by the Armenian andArabic versions, but also by the indirect witnesses of Maximusthe Confessor (7th century), John of Damascus, and pseudo-Apollonius49.

(3) The addition of the word 'prophecies' (r^&\cu=i) in theSyriac text suggests a reference to the following lines of the DNH(68,9-11), dealing with the relationship between the intellectivefaculty and oneiromancy. In these lines, the latter is described asthe only effective way of foreseeing the future, according to theview expressed by the Pythagoreans and the Hebrews.8. Besides the dittography of ,cnoJr .f< ndiricna^ (lines 4-5), twovariants in Iwannis' text are to be noticed:

(1) The first is the omission of the Aristotle's name at 1. 5. Itmust be pointed out that almost the whole tradition of the

44 The opinion that the soul is moved is expressed in the D N H some linesf u r t h e r o n (5 5,20: ... x a i 7tav 0 T I S u v a r a i xtvelv TTJV ^ " X V •••)•

45 In our fragments, 5v was never translated: see e.g. 11.2.46 For this meaning of orav, see Liddell-Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon,

s.v.: 'Adv. of Time, whenever, with a conditional force, so as nearly to eav'.47 However, John of Damascus omits both these expressions: see PG

XCIV 937C1 ff.48 This reading may come from a polygenetical error due to itacism; it

was also to be found in the Greek apograph of Nemesius' fragments in theSirr al-haliqa: see 583,1 [''illata-l-fahm hdssatan].

49 Cf. ibid.:fa-huwafahmu-l-mafhum.

240

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

DNH offers here the reading 'Qpiyevji; (defended by Jaegerand Verbeke)50. Iwannls, too, might have read this name in hiscopy. If so, the omission of the name was likely to be due toideological reasons, because of the early condemnation ofOrigen as a heretic51. Because of this omission, the introduc-tion of the quotation from Plato at 1. 9 was slightly changed('Plato, however, says about it that , . . '5 2) .

(2) Another variant is the presence of the reading ^ocntaa.-xokurtfjcov^, 'and that we generally think (of it)', in place of xaiVOY)<TE(O<; (1. 11), as in the Greek original. The Syriac text seems toallude to DNH 68,21-22 (toixe Se VO7)<TIV Xeyetv 6 IlXaTtov iv TOUTOK;

ou rqv xuptax; VOTJCIV . . .).9. As one can see, the Syriac translator avoids the ellipticity of thecorresponding Greek sentence, by adding (g|i)-n-nr<r7[t«*T-.v ] (1. 7).10. At lines 11-12, a noteworthy agreement in the textualtradition should be pointed out: the inversion rf\c, <Jwx?j<; xai xouca)[i.aTO<; is shared by G, K and John of Damascus, as well as bythe Greek text behind pseudo-Apollonius53.11. The insertion of o before rtfiio.i (1. 4) now makes intelligible apassage, which looked corrupt to Furlani (p. 271).12. The Syriac text needs only the deletion of o before •p^z» rtl (1.16). This was already implicit in Furlani's version. Without this

50 The witness of Sirr al-haliqa, 583,11 [Origanis] b r ings new evidence t othis general agreement .

51 The definitive condemnat ion of Or igen as he te rodox was p r o n o u n c e dby Just inian in his edict of 543 (cf. P G L X X X V I , 945-990), bu t the readingof his works was already forbidden at the beginning of the 5th cen tury : seeG. Fritz, 'Or igen i sme ' , in D T C X I / 2 , 1572 and 1578. A n allusion t o thiscensor ing can be found also in the Compendious History of Dynasties (Ta'rihmuhtasar al-duwal) by Gregor ius Bar-Hebraeus (1220-1286), the r enownedMonophys i t e b i shop and wri ter (see 2nd ed. by A. SalihanI [Beirut 1983],142,17-143,1): ' ( T h e Empress Eudoxia) took with her 29 bishops a m o n gthe opponen t s of J o h n Chrysos tom: they met in Chalcedon, anathematizedhim and depr ived h im of his office, on the pretext that he had no tcondemned the study of the books of the heretic Origenes [Qriganis al-muhalif]'. We can find ' ideological ' al terat ions and censor ings concern ingOr igen in the textual t radi t ion of Euseb ius ' 'ExxXnjaiacmxr) 'IcrropEa: see G .Pasquali, Storia delta tradi^ione e critica del testo (2nd ed. Firenze 1952 [ =1988]), 138 n. 3. However, damnationes against him and his followers,among the Syrians (cf. e.g. Assemani, Bibliotheca Orientalis, II, 33) did notprevent scholars from reading and employing his exegetical works.

52 John of Damascus does not name either Aristotle (or Origen) orPlato: see 937D1-4.

53 See Sirr al-haliqa, 605 ,9 -10 : al-nafs wa-l-g'asad.

241

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

emendation, the words > i » t<\ would be joined (wrongly) to thefollowing period.

The only variant in the Syriac text compared with Morani'sedition is the omission of xauxa oOv ... 6(jifa)vu[i.ov at lines 17-18.

At 1. 37, the word rtfincvni^ (as written in the ms) has beenemended into rCho-iv\, 'greed, lust', in accordance with theGreek text (Xayveia)54. Furlani's translation is not correct, for hereads this word i ^ ^ o i a i ^ and misinterprets the expression as'haughtiness and courage'55.

Finally, another of Furlani's oversights: while translating lines29-30, he reads r^Dcuoao instead of ^ a i o » u o , and writes: 'thejoinings that occur in the nature and in the hypostasis'; but thetrue sense of this sentence is 'the joinings [i.e. coitions] accordingto nature and law' (cf. the Greek text).13. We have corrected the text of 1. 19, as written in the ms(r^V.».-)), into rcdujo. Moreover, the Syriac text omits somephrases still extant in the Greek, such as co^aXoyov tyuxfy a t ^ 7>xal StatpeT &<; ecpajjiev (11. 20-21) and 81'odaQrjGzox; (I.40). At lines 33-34, the falling away by homoioteleuton of TO Se kniizeiQeQ ...kiznzz&ic, X6yo> has reversed the sense of this passage, so that itmeans that the part of the soul 'disobeying' reason embraces'desire' and 'anger', manifestly contradicting the Platonicteachings here expounded.

There are two agreements in possible error between G and thedirect tradition of the DNH (in this case, ms K again): theaddition of TOXQYJTIXOV after xoivco? (1. 23), and the reading levxat,(instead of a r m ) , possibly implied by the Syriac word ^ J »(1. 30).15. At 1. 21, the textus traditus (c i&»a»>.i) is to be emended(re'fcxsujo), for the former makes nonsense of the passage(according to Furlani's translation, it would mean that 'the actionof anger is the angry')56.

G, K and John of Damascus are in agreement once more, allinterpolating ^youv xoivov after yevixov at 1. 13; G agrees with Hand John on reading 6p(£exai instead of opi ovxoa (1. 14), and,finally, with Alfanus, John and the Armenian version in inserting

after ouxo<; (1. 2).

54 We owe this suggestion to Dr. S. Brock.55 See his translation, 272,10-11: Talterigia e il coraggio'.56 'L'azione dell'ira e l'adirato': 273,2. Changes between dalat and waw

seem to be rather easy, particularly in serta mss: see e.g. Mingana, Book ofTreasures [trans.], passim.

242

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

It is worth noticing that the lines 7-9 of the Syriac text almostliterally correspond to a sentence inserted by K after xaxou (1. 6):Y) (i.ev UTOXYJIJIK; TOU xaXou TTJV bu0u|juav XIVET, TJ Bk TOU xaxouUTTOXTJ K; TTJV (J^UXV- Indeed, Iwannls reports a more correct text,for he reads TOV 6U|AOV (r^^=>i».) instead of TTJV (JJUXTJV (John ofDamascus' text, too, has this reading)57, so that, now, the passageacquires a coherent meaning: 'the opinion of good drives todesire, that of evil to anger'58.

VI. Some Tentative Conclusions

a. IWANNIS' WORK: ITS SOURCES AND FATE

Many problems arise from the analysis of Iwannls' work, chieflyregarding its relationship to that of Nemesius. We have seen thatthe authorship of the last section of the ms, from fol. 154aonwards, is all but reliably proved. However, as a result of ourfindings, the attribution of this section to Iwannls, first proposedby Furlani, seems supported by new evidence. In both sections,quotations from the same work, seemingly according to thesame translation, are to be found. Their apparent disagreement,as far as the division of soul is concerned, does not prevent usfrom thinking of a common authorship, for in the DNH, too,different classifications of the parts of the soul are given.

The problem of attribution can be solved otherwise. In theVatican ms, the following sentence can be read, introducingIwannls' extracts59:

'We begin to write selected words from the known book of Mar Iwannls ofDara, first of all from his Book of the Soul...'.

57 See 941A2-3.58 A similar view was expressed by Iwannls in another passage of his

work: see fol. 14288-9: (Barnala) star men regta la qane tabta, madia hemta lametnqem men biita ('[The man], without desire, does not acquire the good,and without anger, does not punish the evil').

59 See t h e V a t i c a n m s , fol . 1 3 3 8 2 - 5 ; cf. F u r l a n i , ' L a p s i c o l o g i a d iGiovanni', 258.

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

By adding a simple sejdme to the Syriac ktdbd id? a, the readingktabe tdte results, so that the source from which the compilerallegedly took the collected extracts would be Iwannls' 'knownbooks', embracing various works besides the De anima. However,both this and other questions can be given a final answer only bythe publication of the complete text of the De anima. Such anedition will certainly provide evidence for a better definition ofIwannls' knowledge of the DNH. It will be useful for the possibleidentification of other Greek sources of his work as well — ahitherto wholly neglected matter. So far, we have been able todiscover one such source: it is Gregory of Nyssa's De opificiohominis (see below, Appendix I).

Moreover, the division of the 'five intellecting parts of soul'(intelligence, thought, opinion, sense, and imagination), explainedby Iwannls in fols ijob-i5 2b of the Vatican ms, has somecorrespondences in Greek patristic writings. This division wastraced back to Ammonius by Furlani60. However, it was one thatgained a considerable currency among Greek authors, so that onecan find it in the above-mentioned De fide orthodoxa of John ofDamascus (cf. PG XCIV 942C-943A = Kotter, PTS12, 89), aswell as in late Byzantine scholastic compilations, such asNicephorus Blemmides' 'Em-TOfT/) Aoyixrj (13th cent.) (cf. PGCXLIIyizDff.).

As to Syriac sources of Iwannls' De anima, two have beenalready pointed out by scholars. A much used writing in Iwannls'work is the Speech on Man's Composition by the Monophysitebishop Ahudemmeh (d. 5 y5)61. This book was published byF. Nau62 and translated into Italian by Furlani63. Furlani didindeed refer to the existence of Ahudemmeh's quotations inIwannls64, but he did not indicate exactly these correspondences.The passages taken by Iwannls from Ahudemmeh's work [ = A]are as follows (according to Furlani's paragraph numeration):

60 See Lapsicologia di Ahudhemmeb, 837 and 840; cf. A m m o n i u s , Commen-tary in De Int., ed. Busse ( C A G I V ; Berlin 1897), 5, 4.

61 O n A h u d e m m e h and his ecclesiastical office in the Jacobi te church ,see Le Q u i e n , Oriens Christianus, I I , 1533; cf- Asseman i , Bibliotheca Orientalis,II, 441 and 448.

62 Patrologia Orientalis, I I I (1909) , 97-115.63 See La psicologia di Ahudbemmeh, 808-15.64 Ibid., 819-20.

244

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

A 14-15 = G 14737-10;A 20-35 = G 147310-14936;A 37-41 = G 14936-14^9;A 43-48 = G I49b9-i5oa4;A 51 [beginning only] = G 15034-6;A 64-66 = G 15036-9;A 69-71 = GA 73-74 = G

According to Barsaum65, Iwannls' De anima has drawn heavily onanother Syriac work on psychology, the Great Treatise on theHuman Soul according to the Scholarchs' Opinions by Yuhanna al-Atarbi al-'Amudl (d. 738).

Finally, one must reckon Iwannls' De anima among the sourcesof Mose bar Kepha's De anima. This being so, we have a goodopportunity to check the relationship between these twoworks. As pointed out by Kraus66, in chap. 30 of Mose's treatisethere is a passage which is apparently based on chap. 1 of theDNH. In reality, it is simply a paraphrase of the passage from theDNH as reported in Iwannls' De anima (published above, frag.3)67. This extract shows in Mose's text the same errors andchanges as in Iwannls', and so provides proof that there is arelationship between these two authors.

There are other closely similar passages in Mose's and Iwannls'works. Mose's views about the identity of intellect, soul andspirit, based on the above-mentioned extract from the DNH, aresubstantially the same as those of Iwannls at the same place68.And Iwannls' discussion concerning the location of the intellectin the human body is clearly echoed in a passage of Mose'sdevoted to the place occupied by the soul69. In Mose's text, as inIwannls', the different opinions of those who place the soul in theheart or in the brain are reported. All these opinions are rejectedby asserting that the soul is located in the whole body. Nevertheless,this assertion appears to be very unusual among Syriac authors.

65 Ba r saum, Histoire, 315.66 K r a u s , op. tit., 340.67 See Braun's translation, lines 10-16, p. 98 (f. 64b of the ms). The

agreement of these lines with a passage in Iwannls' writing was alreadynoticed by Braun himself (n. 2, where the Syriac text of this passage isgiven).

68 Cf. Braun ' s t rans. , 98-9, wi th Furlani , 'La psicologia di G iovann i ' ,259. In the D N H no pendan t to these considera t ions can be traced.

69 Cf. Braun 's trans. , 96-7, wi th Furlani , 'La psicologia di Giovanni ' , 216.

245

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

One can find opposing views, for example, in Job of Edessa (thesoul is in the brain) and Theodorus bar Koni (the soul is in theheart)70. By way of contrast, none of these theories locating thesoul in a particular organ can be found in the DNH.

b. REMARKS ON THE D N H ' S TEXTUAL HISTORY

The significance of the newly found, fragmentary version for thetextual criticism of the DNH is certainly worth discussing. As iswell known, a correct evaluation of the oriental translations ofGreek texts is a far from easy task. A successful conjecturalreading on the part of the translator can easily be misunderstoodas an ancient (and good) manuscript reading. In particular, thiserror occurs when only late Greek mss are extant. As a matter offact, the oldest Greek mss are often contemporary with SeuTEpo?eXX7)vi<jfjt.6<; (9th cent.), or even posterior to it. Accordingto Morani, the misunderstanding is well-known to scholarsstudying the Arabic version of Hunain ibn Ishaq and his son71.However, such mistakes are less likely to be made in the case ofthe present Syriac translation, since it is a very literal version.

Three different collocations in the textual history of the DNHcan be conceived for the collected fragments. The fragments mayhave been: (1) directly translated from the Greek; (2) taken froman independent version; or (3) taken from the Syriac versionknown to the Armenian translators.

The first hypothesis should be rejected in the light of theinternal errors one can detect in the Syriac tradition. These errorshave been pointed out in the Notes on the Text. Some of themmight have been already extant in the ms from which Iwannlstook his extracts of the DNH. In any case, it is unlikely thatIwannls knew Greek.

The second hypothesis is more likely. If it is the case, then onecan assume that the Greek ms underlying the Syriac translationwas related to K, as well as to the copy employed by John ofDamascus. This would account for the fact that these text-

70 See Job of Edessa, in Mingana, Book of Treasures, 32obn-i2 (wherertiha napidnaya, 'soul spirit* is concerned), trans, p. 43, and Theodorus barKoni, Liber Scboliorum, ed. Addai Scher [CSCO, Scr. Syri LXV-LXVI], I,27,5-13: cf. Furlani, La pskologia di Abudhemmeb, 843.

71 See Morani, La tradi^ione manoscritta, 94-5.

246

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

witnesses contain the same brief interpolations. One of theseinterpolations (see notes to frag. 15) appears to reflect a better textin G and in John than in K. Thus, G is to be credited with ahigher place than K in the line of descent from the commonarchetype72. A significant connection with K is shown also by thefew remarkable variants found by Morani in Mose bar Kepha'sextracts73. As to the age of the fragmentary translation, accordingto S. Brock74, it cannot be dated back, for stylistic reasons, earlierthan the seventh century.

Lastly, the identity of the 'Armenian' Syriac version with thefragmentary one could only be demonstrated by a deep investiga-tion of the whole work of Iwannls. If the identity could be proved,then the role of the Syriac translation in the stem ma would have tobe challenged. The evidence given by Morani is, in fact, too weakto separate this translation from the remaining branches of thetradition.

One of the arguments used by Morani is the existence in theSyriac text of a possibly correct reading, ^omxov as againstmx6r)Tixov in the greater part of the mss (see DNH, ed. Morani, 27,n) . As a matter of fact, the former is witnessed also by three othermss, and can be regarded as lectio facilior, for it appears also inAristotle, De anima 413a ff75. It is worth noticing that the roots ofthe verbs hss (to suffer, ntxayew) and hy' (to live, £TJV) are verysimilar when written in Syriac characters, and so confusion couldeasily be accounted for. In short, this reading could have been

72 Moran i supposes K o r its direct ancestor to be the result of contamina-t ion with very old mss. N o doub t , there are g o o d reasons for acceptingthis, because D N H ' s tradit ion is certainly a contaminated one . But we mus tremember that a 'horizontal t ransmission ' theory can be a facile expedient ,an expedient which allows one to reduce to a desired order all the textualphenomena (such as the presence of c o m m o n readings in otherwise unre-lated mss), which cannot be justified otherwise. For a discussion of contami-nation as a text-critical p rob lem, with a convincing example, see M.Martelli , 'Considerazioni in to rno alia contaminazione nella tradizione deitest i v o l g a r i ' , in La critica del testo: Problem/ di metodo ed esperien^e di lavoro.Atti del Convegno di Lecce 22-26 ottobre 1984 ( R o m a 1985), 127-49.

73 See M o r a n i , La tradizione manoscritta, 100.74 Personal communication (in a letter dated 25 th Oct. 1990). We take

the opportunity of giving Dr. Sebastian Brock (The Oriental Institute,Oxford) our thanks for this and other suggestions about our study ofIwannls' text.

75 It was substituted for qpimx6v in ms D [Dresden, Publ. Libr., Da 57](cf. DNH, 72,5). For a discussion of these readings, cf. Morani, Latradi\ione manoscritta, 205.

247

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

easily introduced into the text by a copyist, perhaps from amarginal gloss.

A second argument is the omission of an interpolation existingin all the witnesses (see DNH, ed. Morani 70, 7). This omission isnot an error, and cannot, therefore, have any disjunctive force. In itsturn, the common interpolation in the rest of the tradition hasonly conjunctive force, so that, according to a well-known editorialrule76, it cannot be employed for the definition of the stemmacodicum11.

An examination of the paraphrase of the DHN in the Sirr al-haliqa would be no less important. The Greek text hidden behindthese excerpta nemesiana appears to be very early, for the Sirr'srecension B, in which the excerpta were included, dates back tothe age of the Caliph al-Ma'miin (813-8 3 3)78. These excerpta couldprove helpful for the study of Nemesius' Syriac translations too.As pointed out earlier, the DNH is not the common source of thestrictly similar passages in pseudo-Apollonius' Sirr and in Job ofEdessa's Book of Treasures™. However, according to Kraus, thissource is to be placed in a Syriac milieu, perhaps in the pre-Islamicage.

The paraphrase of Nemesius' is an excursus inserted into theshort chapter of the Sirr devoted to the soul, which, in its turn, ispreceded by an account of the reasons for man's 'standing up'80.It is worth noticing that, in this very context, Job says that theproblem of the existence and nature of the soul has already beendealt with in a book of his On the Soul (Ktdbd ... d'al napsa)^.

76 See e.g. D ' A . S. Aval le , Principi di critica testuale (2nd ed. , P a d o v a

1978), 47-5O-77 On these problems, cf. the observations of R. Browning, in his review

of M o r a n i , La tradisyone manoscritta, The Classical Review 32 (1982), 149-51.78 U. Weisser, Buch iiber das Geheimnis, 24-25 [German sect ion]. M.

Ul lmann ' s desire for a ' synopt ic ' publ ica t ion of all Nemes ius ' Arabictranslat ions, expressed in his review of Weisser 's w o r k {journal for theHistory of Arabic Science 4 [1980], 9 1 : 'Vielleicht ware es jedoch g u tgewesen, wenn diese Nemes ios -Uberse tzung in einfcr gesonder ten Publ ica-tion synoptisch mit der zweiten arabischen Nemesios-Obersetzung ediertworden ware'), has been partially fulfilled by Kh. Samir ('Les versionsarabes', 114-39).

79 Th i s fact was noticed by U. Weisser t o o , so correc t ing a widespreadmisunderstanding of Kraus' observations about the relationship betweenthese works: see her Das 'Buch iiber das Geheimnis der Schopfung' von Pseudo-Apollonius von Tyana (Berl in-New Y o r k 1980), 58 n. 24.

80 See ed. Weisser, 395-99 [Arabic text ] .81 See Mingana ' s t rans. , 94 ; Syriac text, 3 5 2 ^ 5 - 2 2 ; cf. ibid., p . xxii.

248

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

Unfortunately, this work is now lost. If its contents were identicalto those of the excerpt a nemesiana in pseudo-Apollonius, then theexistence of a common source could be inferred, which mightconstitute a different branch of the Syriac tradition of the DNH.Weisser's opinion that these excerpta are a later insertion into thework82 does not preclude this possibility. Both Job's and pseudo-Apollonius' writings were composed nearly in the same age andmilieu (al-Ma'mun's Baghdad). Thus the supposition that thesame materials were employed by both the Syriac philosopherand the Arabic compiler (by what means, we do not know) seemsquite reasonable.

A worthwhile conclusion from this brief essay would be aninvitation to scholars to undertake a wider search for quotationsof the DNH and for evidence of its influence in Syriacliterature. This is a much-neglected but very promising field.One could compare the abundant material collected by Samir inhis study of the fate of Nemesius' work amongst Arabicauthors.

Appendix I. Gregory of Nyssa's De opificio hominis in Iwdnnis ofDdrd's De anima

Gregory of Nyssa's De opificio hominis, written in 379, was a majorsource of inspiration for Nemesius, and for biblical exegetes andphilosophers in the medieval age as well, on the difficult problemof the creation of man83. The Greek text of this work wasreprinted in Patrologia Graeca, vol. XLIV, 123-256. A critical edi-tion by H. Horner is being prepared as the fourth volume of theseries Gregori Nysseni Opera published by Brill. A complete Syriac

82 Buch iiber das Geheimnis, 6 5 : a c c o r d i n g t o Weis se r , t h e t e r m i n o l o g i c a ldifference between the excerpta and the text of Sirr al-haliqa is quiteremarkable.

83 For the possible knowledge of this work by medieval Jewish exege-tes, see G. Sermoneta, 'II neo-platonismo nel pensiero dei nuclei ebraicistanziati nell'Occidente Latino (Riflessioni sul 'Commento al Libro dellaCreazione' di Rabbi Sabbetai Donnolo)', in Gli Ebrei nell'Alto Medio Evo,Settimane di studio del Centro italiano di studi sulFAlto Medio Evo XXVI(Spoleto 1980), 867-98 n. 50 and 912-13 n. 74 (in the West) and B. Chiesa,Creazione e caduta dell'uomo nell'esegesi giudeo-araba medievale (Brescia 1989), 66n. 53 and 70 n. 22 (in the East). For its employment in the 'definitions'literature, see G. Furlani, "II libro delle Definizioni e Divisioni' di Michelel'lnterprete', Atti Ace. Na%. Lincei, Mem. Sc. Mor. VI, 2 (1926), 185-86 and193. Gregory's writing is also quoted three times in M65e bar Kepha's Deparadiso: cf. PG CXI 486C1-2, 514D11 ff., 516A9 ff.

249

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

version84, recently studied85, is found in ms vat. syr. 106, togetherwith translations of other works by Gregory86.

Now a new witness of this wide-spread use of the work can beadded. In Iwannls' De anima, some brief extracts from chaps 12and 15 of the De opificio hominis are inserted, as the followingcomparison shows:

1. PG 156C6 = G

O TOLVUV

TWV \iopLoiq Tiai otofxauxou; r ^ cu . i - ^ -gA VIT-U».-\

T7)V VOYJTYJV

Ivspysiav

d>v 01 fiiv ev xapSia

TO Y)YE(i.ovtxov elvai xi6evxai

ot 8k TW eyxetpaXtp

xov vouv

2. PG 156C13-158A1 = Gi

SlOC TO 80XEIV

7ta><; T7)V (XECyyjV TOG TZOLVTOC,

GO^LO-TOC, iiiiyzw x&pocv au-ajv

<o<; rJji; 7TpoaipeTixy)<; XIVYJCTEOX;

EX TOU (ziaou r^k\cu^.\^\^n r^ivs^-so

zlc svexai OUTCOI; zlc, svepyeiav

84 See Assemani , Bibliotheca Orientalis, I I I / 1 , 21-22; B a u m s t a r k , Geschichte,79 n . 7 ; H . L a n g e r b e c k , Gregorii Njsseni Opera V I , lxi ff. (cf. M . G e e r a r d ,C/avw Patrum Graecorum, I I , n. 3154). Cf. in par t icu la r M . F . G . P a r m e n t i e r ,'Syriac Trans la t ions o f G r e g o r y o f Nyssa ' , Orienta/ia Lovaniensia Periodica 20(1989): for the De opificio hominis, see p p . 164-66, w h e r e a detai led list o f t hehitherto known fragments of its Syriac version is given.

85 Cf. T. Clementoni, M. R. Del Deo and F. Grassi, 'La versione siriacadel "De opificio hominis" di Gregorio di Nissa', Studi e ricerche sulFOrientecristiano 5 (1982), 81-101; 157-71; 6 (1983), 39-56; 181-95; 7 (1984), 25-50;191-206. In this essay, an Italian version of the De opificio hominis, chaps. 9-11and 13-14 (according to the Syriac translation), is published, provided witha philological commentary. For a brief account of some characteristicfeatures of this Syriac translation, see 5 (1982), 81-87.

86 See H . Wiche r B r o w n , in Catalogus translationum et commentariorum, V( W a s h i n g t o n 1984), s.v. Gregorius Nyssenus, 1-250: 2 1 ; cf. Bibliotheca Orienta-l's, I, P- 569.

2 5 0

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

Kal (xapxupiov 7roteTTai

TOU Xoyou TT]V XuTCY)pav re

xai

U aTOU av0pd>7TOu SiaOeaiv

o n SoxeT 7rtoc; xa Toiauxa 7ta07)

' TO fiipoc; TOUTO

01 §*£ TOV iyxEcpaXov a<pi£pouvT£<;

Tto Xoyiafito toCT7T£p axpo7roXiv

( ~ 156D7-11) <ni» KuiiA.i ÂcAi

SE xai OUTOI _.ûsi9o CTA

TO 7rapay£CT0ai TOU xaOsoTCOTO!; r^^x..T ,tr>

Ttov x£xaxto[iivtov xcnq, (jLYjviyyat; ^C^CTIMCVSJ.A rîxLu 1A=>.T ^cucn. i

xai TO ev ayvoia TOU 7rp£7i:ovTO(; —

ZOUC, EV (XE07) Xi

3. PG 158D1-3 = G 14039-10:

O u (JL7)V

(XTCOSELÎV 7TOtOU(i.aL TaUTTjV

TOU T07uxaT<; TICTI. 7TEpi,ypacpaT<;

T7]V aod)(XaTOV OOJ

4 . P G 160D6-8 = G 140312-14:

T6v Se vouv 6(ji.oTi(Jito<;

EXaCTTtp TtOV (XOpOCOV

xaTa TOV acppaaTov 1

avaxpaaEtoi; Xoyov

VOfXtCTTEOV

5. PG 160D12-13 = G 140314-17:

vi xapStai;

xai vEtppoix; 6 0EO<;

tOCTTE X'-A-) ^ r ^ S J \ p s

TO voepov xaTaxXeiouaiv —

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

6. P G 162A7-9 =

'H yap vorjTT) <puai<;

OUTE Tau; xsvtoaEoiv k

Tfa)V CTCOji.aTO)V

OUTE T t p TCXEOVOCÔVTl

•ZJ\C, aapxo<; Eâ)6eiTa

7. P G 162B3-9 = '

OUTCJ xai 6 vou?

Si'oXou TOD opyavou

xai xaTaXXrjXcoi; Tal<;

EVEpysian; xa06 TOcpuxsv

EXaCTTO) TfOV (JlEpCOV

Trpo(ia7rT6(i.£vo(; ZT\ (AIV OJJRCUV

T6Jv xaTaa <fdai

TO oixstov EVYjpyyjasv

E7ri SE TWV aaOEVouvTtov SsâaOai v\«»i*w.i\ ^..i Âcno

T7)V TE)(VIXY)V aUTOU XlVY]aiV

a7ipaxTO<; TE

xa i avEV£py7jTO<; E[ZEIV£

(cf. 160B9-15)

8. PG 177B4-C6 = G I4ob7-i4iaio

aXX OTl O U / l (XEp£l TlVl

T(OV EV TJfi.'lV 6 VOUi;

xa i 81a 7ravTa)v ECTTIV

OUTE E^wOev TT£piXa(J.f

OUTE EVSOGEV XpaTOUfiEVOi;

TauTa yap E7Ti xaScov>1 aXXcov Tivtov

Xeyerai' H SE TOU VOU

7rpo<; TOxoivcovia a<ppaaTov TE

Xai aV£7UVO7)TOV

T7)v auvaepEiav

OUTE EVTO<; ouaa

252

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

(OUXE yap ey>tpax£Txai

acofxaxi xo aawfiaxov)OUXE exXO? 7T£pi£}(OUCTa

(ou yap 7T£piXa(i.pav£ixi xa aawfxaxa)aXXa xaxa xiva xporcov

XE xal axaxavorjxov6 VOUt; XT) <pUCT£l « > ' - ' \ iîOOl O<73

xa l 7rpoaa7Tx6(i.£VO(;

xal Iv auxyj xal nzpi auxyjvQzopzitCLi OUXE £yxa07j[XEVO(; ,cnal^. ^^K> a^ c\lOUXE TC£p!,7lXU(T(T6(Jl£VO(;

aXXa he, oux ECTXIV zlneiv

OTI xaxa xov ISLOV re'^cvLuoa vy.r^ evl :e[p(i.6v

xal 6 vou<; £V£py6<; yivExai re'ocn <<i\=i±â rîocn amEt 8E xt

xauxyjvet xax'e

xal T % 8Lavoia<; YJ XIVTJCTK;

xax'exeTvo

The 'quotation technique' employed by Iwannis in the above-edited fragments is very similar to that used in the excerptafrom Nemesius. More or less long passages are reported, takenfrom various places in his source. Some of them are abridged,but voluntary omissions by Iwannis cannot be easily distinguishedfrom those already existing in his Vorlage. However, as a rule,Gregory's text is literally quoted (see in particular frags, iand 8)87.

Indeed, this version has nothing to do with the translation inms vat. syr. 106: compare, e.g., the first fragment of the formerwith the corresponding passage of the latter, reproduced herebelow (fol.

ocn.A

87 Iwannis of Dara's knowledge of Gregorius' works is well-known. Along passage from Gregorius' De anima et resurrectione is quoted by Iwannisin De resurrectione, book 4, chap. 24: see Bibliotheca Orientalis, III / i , p. 22.

253

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

'Let all the vain speech be silent, of those who, according to a vacuousopinion, confine the action perceived by means of the intellect within theparts of body. Some of them place under the control of the heart the rule ofall that is in man. Others, on the contrary, say that, in man, the intellectresides in the brain'.

As we can see from these lines, the Vatican version is a free,sometimes paraphrastic one88. This feature, according to scho-lars89, is typical of the first age of Syriac literature (jth-6thcent.). The literal and careful translation quoted by Iwannls —almost a verbum de verbo rendering — may be dated back to the7th-8th centuries90.

Appendix II. Greek-Syriac-Arabic Glossary of Philosophical Terms

The Syriac terms of this glossary are taken from the fragmentsof the DNH's Syriac version edited here. The Arabic ones arethose employed in the translation commonly ascribed toHunain ibn Ishaq (or to his son). The latter is to be found in atleast three mss91. We have consulted a photostatic copy,available in the Universita Cattolica di Milano, of the ms keptin Cairo, Coptic Patriarchal Library, Graf 561 (= Simaika 363),theol. 224, fols. 2a-io5a92. The items are listed according to thealphabetical order of the Greek words. References to our

88 This can be verified by comparing the complete translation of the twochapters quoted by Iwannls: see fols. 49vb43-j irc2o in the Vatican ms forchapter 12 [< fragms. 1-7], and fols. 54raio-j 5^33 for 15 (numbered in thems the 16th) [<fragm. 8].

89 See in particular the fundamental study of S. Brock, 'Towards aHistory of Syriac Translation Technique', in III Symposium Sjriacum: Orienta-lia Christiana Analecta 221 (Roma 1983), 1-15. Cf. also 'Aspects of Transla-tion Technique in Antiquity', in Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 20(Durham [N.C.] 1979), 69-87.

90 A characteristic work, dating back to this period, is the wholly literalSyriac translation of the first part of Aristotle's Organon (Categoriae, DeInterpretatione and Analytica Priora) by Gregory Bishop of the Arabs (d.724). It was published by G. Furlani in Atti R. Ace. Nav^. dei Lincei, Mem.Sc. mor., VI, vol. 5 (1933-1935) and vol. 6 (1937); cf. G. Furlani, 'Laversione e il commento di Giorgio delle Nazioni all'organo aristotelico',Studi italiani di filologia classica, n.s. 3 (1923), 305-33.

91 See Samir, 'Les versions arabes', 110-11.92 On this ms and its reproduction, see Morani, LM tradi^ione manoscritta,

90 fF. We were allowed to read this reproduction through the good officesof Dr. Paolo Branca (Universita Cattolica di Milano).

254

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

edition have been added. We were not always able to find thecorresponding Arabic term. However, gaps due to the illegibilityof the ms employed have been pointed out.

(12,23) =

(6.3) =(8,7) =

(4.4) =(12,6) =

aXoyo<; (4,2) =avayxaicx; (12,21) =

ava(i.v7)(T£ca(; (8,2) =

avTixeixai. (12,15) =

aper/j (12,51) =

v) (12,27) =

(13,14) =

yevoc; (12,2) = ^

(3,29) = rî^-.x. = [cannot be read].

(7,1) =Siavoia (12,7) =Soyâ (3,14) =86â (3,12) =

SpatTTtXOV (15,19) =

(3,21) =

(12,33) =

el8o<;(i3,2) =

EvSeTa (12,25) =

evepyeia (3,23) = rî\cu.vaa>»> = J«»;

EVVOYJCTT) (6,6) =

(9,1) =(12,36) =

(7,7) = Pîria-.V. = J* J

2 5 5

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

riiiri (12,8) =eupiaxexai (13,11) =

H

(3,18) =YjSoVY) (9 ,3) = r^k\Or£jJCTJ = Si!.

0

Geoopta (3,29) = «L.ior<r^ = [cannot be read];ta (10,7) =OV (12,37) =

y] (15,22) =6c, (15,21) =

0upa0ev e7ieiCTtevai (3,23-24) =

K

xa6'£auT7]v (10,5) = chio i h i » =xaipo? (12,55) = rdi=i = cJ>;xa-ra Oecopiav (12,16) =

(; (1,3) =(12,25) =

xoivcovia (10,11) =xoivwc (12,23) =

xpaai? (11,5) =xptoii; (7,2) =

A

yj (13,8) =Xoyo<; (12,32) =

(9,3) = r^lMii. = Sil.

M

(10,6) =(13,2) =(12,5 5) =(8,2) =(8,4) =

(i.V7)(JLOV£UTlXOV ( 8 , l ) =

256

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

N

a (2,6) =V6TJOI<; (7,5) = c^W.v. = JLJl â\VO(i.O<; (12,30) =

(12,42) =

(2,4) =

0

opyavov (12,38) = .^êviîor^ = ill;opexxixov (12,23) =

O? (13,4) =(12,26) =

PM (7.4) = niAre^. = J-.;opo? (15,1) = re sscujiv = (a form of the verb Jb-);

(3,17) =(14,2) =

nTcaOvjTixo? (13,3) = " ' • " '> • =

TOX6O<; (5,1) = r£*

(12,32) =

7TpOXO7T7J (3,28) =

(12,54) =

(12,3) =auvafxcpoxepov (3,38) =

(TUV£CTT<XVai ( 3 , 6 ) =

(7,3) =(3,22) =

(3,27) = rt/\«WT*

(12,43) = r£-za*cua = ly (ms f(14,2) = rCxûazn = i.î. (ms

(1,2) = r ^ i ^6<; (10,3) =

257

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


NEMESIANA SYRIACA

ioc, (13,12) =

(7,8) =TO elvai Xcd 7} (m<XpZ,lC, (3 ,25-26) =

TO voepov (3,19) =TOTCOI; (12,56) =

TpO7TO<; (12,54) =

5,12) =

ia (5,1) =cpavxaaia (15,5) =

.7)V7] (8,6) =

ov (4,1) =(5,3) =

cpaGXoc; (12,4) =

(2,8) =

YJI; (12,5) =

(10,2) =

258

at Hum



Dow

nloaded from


Journal of Semitic Studies 36.2, 1991

Documents

Transcript of Journal of Semitic Studies 36.2, 1991