SAINT EPHREM the SYRIAN ARMENIAN DISPUTE HYMNS BETWEEN VIRGINITY and CHASTITY By
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SAINT EPHREM THE SYRIAN ARMENIAN DISPUTE HYMNS BETWEEN VIRGINITY AND CHASTITY by EDWARD G. MATHEWS, JR. Tunkhannock, PENNSYLVANIA USA Competition, contention, and debate have been part of human culture almost since its very beginning. J. Huizinga, now already a half century ago, demonstrated how contest or competition, friendly and otherwise, is at the root of civilization — the very warp and woof, as it were, of human interrelationship1. This integral element of human nature has nat- urally left its clear and predominate mark on human culture, but finds its most intellectual manifestation in the realm of literature, already in the oldest surviving remnants. This competition, or contention, is an element found in various genres and literatures, and the development of these various genres are almost certainly connected, though these connections have yet to be traced out. But one type in particular is devoted almost specifically to this theme: the dispute poem, also known as the prece- dent poem, which is closely related to the debate poem, or the dialogue poem, which is somewhat less contentious. Because dispute poems are found over such a wide variety of litera- tures and over such a vast expanse of time, scholars are not yet able to trace out a detailed, single ‘definition’, or structural format for the dis- pute poem. Nonetheless, the main features are relatively discernible, par- ticularly the general format and the general content. They are nearly always poetic in form, with two (though occasionally more) antagonists engaged in a debate or dialogue, where each proclaims his or her merit or virtues. This debate is then followed by a conclusion, or resolution, which can be left as self-evident, or determined either by a concession of one party or by the decision of a third party, who need not necessarily be the narrator. Thus, the basic components can be summarised as follows2: 1 HUIZINGA, 1949. 2 Abridged from VANSTIPHOUT, 1990, and MURRAY, 1995. REArm 28 (2001-2002) 143-169. 144 E. G. MATHEWS I. introduction of disputants II. subject matter of the dispute III. the dispute itself IV. verdict While the length of each section is quite varied, it is clearly category III that normally occupies the largest part of the poems. There exist, of course, many other variations within these four categories, and there are many exceptions to this pattern, but this little schema serves for the majority of the examples, as well as for the examples treated below. As for the identity of the disputants, in most of the extant examples, they are far more likely to be non-human figures who have been person- ified for the purpose of the debate. These may be such things as animals, plants, seasons, months, foodstuffs, tools, etc. Particular examples of non-human disputants found in extant dispute poems include Summer and Winter, The Bird and The Fish, Silver and Copper, The Crane and The Raven, Wheat and the grain God Nisaba, The Willow and The Lau- rel, The Tamarisk and The Palm, the Goat and the Date-Palm, as well as such group disputes as the Dispute of the Months, the Dispute of the Trees, and the Dispute of the Alphabet, to provide but a sampling. There are, of course, examples of dispute poems where the combatants are human figures, but these are almost exclusively confined to great histor- ical figures or gods; it is generally only in the case of later, Jewish- Christian, examples, where these are found, and the disputants here, of course, are primarily the great biblical figures. Since the seminal study of M. Steinschneider, nearly a century ago3, the genre of dispute poem has attracted a great deal of scholarly interest, particularly in recent decades4. Scholarly diligence has produced numer- ous examples beginning already in the earliest, Sumerian, literature, which goes back to the early second millenium BC, as well as in nearly all other ancient Near Eastern literatures5. The genre of dispute poem has then continued to prosper vertically in “an unmistakable formal line from the earliest compositions”6 to other Near Eastern and Mediter- 3 STEINSCHNEIDER, 1908. 4 See the studies collected in REININK, 1991. 5 In addition to the studies just mentioned, see, for example, KRAMER, 1961, LAMBERT, 1960, ALSTER, 1990, VANSTIPHOUT, 1990, 1992, VOGELZANG, 1991, VAN DER TOORN, 1991. 6 REININK, 1991, p. 3. The term “vertical” also comes from this work; it refers to the chronological development of the genre, while the term “horizontal” refers to other related literary genres of debate. ARMENIAN DISPUTE HYMNS BETWEEN VIRGINITY AND CHASTITY 145 ranean literatures: numerous examples exist in Egyptian7, Hebrew8, Ara- bic9, Persian10, and Greek11. And from these, the dispute poem found its way into such medieval literatures as Old Norse12, Provencal13, Old Irish14, Latin15, Dutch16, German17, French18, Spanish19, and Italian20. These few can no doubt be vastly expanded by scholars in other fields. In Syriac Christian literature, one finds numerous examples of the dis- pute poem21. Less than half a century ago it was Pierre Grelot who first noted that its ancient Mesopotamian roots were still discernible22. This line of development of the dispute poem from Mesopotamian literature to Syriac literature has been traced out more recently and more fully by Robert Murray23. But, it has been largely due to the efforts of Sebastian Brock that so many examples of this genre in Syriac literature are now available in modern editions and translations24. Brock has himself gath- ered together a collection of more than fifty examples of various Syriac dialogue poems, from as early as the fourth century to medieval exam- ples, and even some modern examples, many of which he has published or is in the process of editing25. The dispute poem in Syriac can be found in all three of Syriac’s primary poetical forms: the mêmrâ, pl. mêmrê; the madrasâ, pl. madrasê; and the sugîtâ, pl. sugyatâ, though this last is probably the most common. As it is of great importance for the devel- opment of early Christian literature, mention should be made here that 7 MASPERO, 1886. 8 VAN BEKKUM, 1991. 9 LITTMANN, 1951, MASSÉ, 1961, WAGNER, 1962, MATTOCK, 1991. 10 ETHÉ, 1882, KUIPER, 1960, MASSÉ, 1961. 11 WERHAHN, 1953. 12 WIDDING, 1959. 13 KNOBLOCH, 1886, SELBACH, 1886, KÖHLER, 1959. 14 DATTIN, 1902. 15 WALTHER, 1984, SCHMIDT, 1991. 16 AXTERS, 1943. 17 JANTZEN, 1896, KASTEN, 1973. 18 KNOBLOCH, 1886. 19 KRAEMER, 1956, FIORE, 1966. 20 STIEFEL, 1914. For more general, comparative, studies, see REISS, 1969, FROLEYKS, 1973, and BOSSY, 1976, and the general bibliography in REININK, 1991, pp. xi-xx. 21 For a long time, scholars knew primarily only of those attributed to the fifth-century Eastern Syrian writer Narsai; see NARSAI, 1896, but cf. Murray, 1995, pp. 180-184, for a brief review of others. 22 GRELOT, 1958. 23 MURRAY, 1995; see also BROCK, 1979, 1989. 24 BROCK, 1979, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1987, 1989, 1991. 25 Many were first published in BROCK, 1982. A list of both published and unpub- lished examples can be found in the various footnotes in BROCK, 1984; this list is now updated in BROCK, 1991, pp. 117-119. 146 E. G. MATHEWS the Syriac sugîtâ almost certainly constitutes the primary source of the Byzantine kontakion26. Brock has on more than one occasion discussed the various types of these Syriac dispute poems, which he tends to refer to as dialogue poems, and has divided the Syriac examples into five basic types on the basis of the evenness of the dialogue and the intervention of any narra- tive into the dialogue. His classification can be briefly summarized in the following schema27: I. Formal dialogue with alternating stanzas II. Dialogue without alternating stanzas III. Dialogue with narrative framework. More than two interlocutors possible. IV. Narrative containing speeches [ exclusively mêmrê ] V. Introduction of author into narrative [ exclusively mêmrê ] As with the more ancient examples, Syriac dispute poems also reveal a rich variety in the disputants; here too, personifications are more numerous and Brock lists such examples of surviving disputants as the Body and the Soul28, Gold and Wheat, the Jordan and the Pishon, Grace and Justice, as well as one example of a Dispute between the Months29. But in Syriac one also finds a good number of examples in which the disputants are biblical figures. For example, Brock lists surviving dis- putes between Cain and Abel, Abraham and Isaac, Joseph and Potiphar’s wife, Mary and Gabriel, and even Joseph and Mary. One also finds dis- utes between non-biblical, historical, persons, such as found in the dis- putes between Nero and Peter, King Shapur and the Martyrs, Helena and the Jewish People, and Cyril and Nestorius. Certain others involve groups of people, such as in the disputes between John the Baptist and the Crowd, Christ and the Pharisees, and Christ and the Synagogue. Not a few of these dialogue poems that have survived in Syriac are ascribed to the greatest of the Syrian poets, Ephrem the Syrian, who lived in Nisibis and Edessa in the fourth century (c.309 — 373) of the 26 The first lengthy study was that of GROSDIDIER DE MATONS, 1977. His negative con- clusion was quickly countered by DE HALLEUX, 1978, PETERSEN, 1985, and BROCK, 1985. More recently, however, caution has been urged about deciding in either direction in such a biligual milieu; see CAMERON, 1991. The kontakion certainly has classical roots as well; see KARAVITES, 1993. 27 Summarized from BROCK, 1987, 1991. 28 In addition to BROCK, 1995, see DRIJVERS, 1991. 29 A complete, revised listing in BROCK, 1991, pp. 117-119. ARMENIAN DISPUTE HYMNS BETWEEN VIRGINITY AND CHASTITY 147 Christian era30.