Patristica - Oecumenica Bd

Diliana Atanassova, Tinatin Chronz (Hg.)

Beiträge zu Gottesdienst und Geschichte der fünf altkirchlichen Patriarchate für Heinzgerd Brakmann zum 70. Geburtstag

orientalia - patristica - oecumenica Bd. 6.2 LIT orientalia – patristica – oecumenica

herausgegeben von/edited by Dietmar W. Winkler (Universität Salzburg)

Vol. 6.2

LIT Beiträge zu Gottesdienst und Geschichte der fünf altkirchlichen Patriarchate für Heinzgerd Brakmann zum 70. Geburtstag Teilband 2

herausgegeben von Diliana Atanassova und Tinatin Chronz

LIT Synaxis katholike

Gedruckt mit freundlicher Unterstützung der Gertrud-und-Alexander Böhlig Stiftung im Stifterverband für die Deutsche Wissenschaft und des Zentrums zur Erforschung des Christlichen Ostens der Universität Salzburg (ZECO)

Umschlagbild (Detail): Erscheinung des Kreuzes als Lebensbaum im Tympanon über dem Eingang (Südseite) in die Kreuzkirche bei Mzcheta, Georgien (6.Jh.) Foto: Alexander Mchedlidze (Gori, Georgien)

Satz: Diliana Atanassova, Tinatin Chronz Umschlaggestaltung: Diana Trampova-Stoyanova

Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.d-nb.de abrufbar. ISBN 978-3-643-50552-1

©LIT VERLAG GmbH & Co. KG LIT VERLAG Wien 2014 Dr.W.Hopf Berlin 2014 Krotenthallergasse 10/8 Verlagskontakt: A-1080 Wien Fresnostr. 2 Tel. +43 (0) 1-409 56 61 D-48159 Münster Fax +43 (0) 1-409 56 97 Tel. +49 (0) 2 51-62 03 20 E-Mail: [email protected] Fax +49 (0) 2 51-23 19 72 http://www.lit-verlag.at E-Mail: [email protected] http://www.lit-verlag.de

Auslieferung: Deutschland: LIT Verlag Fresnostr. 2, D-48159 Münster Tel. +49 (0) 2 51-620 32 22, Fax +49 (0) 2 51-922 60 99, E-Mail: [email protected] Österreich: Medienlogistik Pichler-ÖBZ, E-Mail: [email protected] E-Books sind erhältlich unter www.litwebshop.de

QUOTATIONS FROM THE PHYSIOLOGUS IN A HOMILY OF THE COPTIC HOLY WEEK LECTIONARY

Alin SUCIU Hamburg, Germany

According to a colophon which appears in some manuscripts of the Coptic Holy Week lectionary,1 this liturgical book was compiled in the 12th century by the patriarch Gabriel ibn Turaik (1131–1146 CE).2 In his monumental encyclopedia entitled The Lamp of Darkness, Abū al-Barakāt confirms this information.3 At the end of the 13th or early 14th century, the biblical lessons had been enriched and reorganized by Peter, bishop of Behnesā.4 Furthermore, Peter added to the lectionary a number of extracts from several Patristic homilies, which he interspersed among the biblical lections.5 The Copts later supplemented these Patris- tic readings with a series of other homilies dedicated to the Holy Week, but the latter circulated in separate Arabic manuscripts, apart from the lectionary.6 The Coptic Holy Week lectionary has been translated into Arabic and, from this language, into Ethiopic. According to Ignazio Guidi, the translation into Ge‘ez was made in the 14th century, during the episcopacy of Abbā Salāmā.7 The Ethiopic version of the lectionary (ግብረ፡ ሕማማት) is much longer, the Abys-

1 Edition of the Bohairic text in O. H. E. BURMESTER, Le lectionnaire de la semaine sainte. 2 vols. (PO 24–25). Paris 1933–1934. 2 On the Patriarch Gabriel ibn Turaik, see C. D. G. MÜLLER, Gabriel II. Ibn Turaik, 70. Papst und Patriarch des Missionsbereichs des Heiligen Markos, in: OC 74 (1990), 168–186. 3 L. VILLENCOURT, Les observances liturgiques et la discipline du jeûne dans l’Église copte (Ch. XVI–XIX de la Lampe des ténèbres), in: Mus 36 (1923), 249–292, here 260. 4 The exact date of Peter’s episcopacy is debatable, cf., e. g., U. ZANETTI, Is the Ethiopian Holy Week Service Translated from Sahidic? Towards a Study of the Gebra Ḥemāmāt, in: B. ZEWDE, R. PANKHURST, T. BAYENE (eds.), Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference of Ethiopian Studies, Addis Ababa, April 1–6 1991. Vol. 1. Addis Ababa 1994, 765–783, here 765–766; D. V. PROVERBIO, La recensione etiopica dell’omelia pseudocrisostomica de ficu exarata ed il suo tréfonds orientale (ÄthF 50). Wiesbaden 1998, 101–202, fn. 22. 5 O. H. E. BURMESTER, Two Services of the Coptic Church Attributed to Peter, Bishop of Behnesā, in: Mus 45 (1932), 235–254, here 236–237. 6 Cf. U. ZANETTI, Homélies copto-arabes pour la Semaine Sainte, in: Augustinianum 23 (1983), 517–523; J.-M. SAUGET, Une ébauche d’homéliaire copte pour la Semaine Sainte, in: ParOr 14 (1987), 167–202. 7 I. GUIDI, Storia della letteratura etiopica. Rome 1932, 30. On Abbā Salāmā’s activity, see A. VAN LANTSCHOOT, Abbā Salāma, métropolite d’Éthiopie (1348–1388) et son rôle de tra- ducteur, in: Atti del Convegno Internazionale di Studi Etiopici (Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. Quaderni 48). Rome 1960, 397–401. 678 Alin Suciu sinian Church enriching it with several new texts, both biblical and Patristic.8 The Bohairic version of several Patristic extracts added by Peter of Behnesā were published for the first time in 1886 by Urbain Bouriant.9 In 1932, Oswald H. E. Burmester edited and translated into English twenty-three such extracts, after several manuscripts ranging from the 14th to the 18th century.10 The lemmata mention the author – pretended or real – of the exhortations, without any further indication as to the provenance of the texts. Thus, nine extracts are attributed to Shenoute of Atripe (BURMESTER nos. 1, 3–6, 9–10, 14–15), eight to John Chrysostom (BURMESTER nos. 7, 12–13, 16–17, 19–20, 22), three to Athanasius of Alexandria (BURMESTER nos. 18, 21, 23), one to Constantine of Siout (BURMESTER no. 2), Peter of Alexandria (BURMESTER no. 8) and Severian of Gabala (BURMESTER no. 11). To his credit, Burmester found the source of six extracts. Thus, he identified no. 5 as an extract from Shenoute’s sermon What Person Would Say (clavis coptica 0767),11 nos. 12, 16–17 as John Chrysostom, De proditione Iudae, hom. 1 (CPG 4336),12 no. 11 as Ps.-Severian of Gabala, In Michaelem, hom. 2 (CPG 4280; clavis coptica 0334),13 and no. 18 as Ps.-Athanasius of Alexandria/ Alexander of Alexandria, De anima et corpore (CPG 2004; clavis coptica 0223).14 Burmester also indicated that “[h]omily No. 13 though entitled St. John Chrysostom, is obviously merely a different version of No. 4 which is attributed to Abba Shenouti.”15 Finally, he pointed out that no. 23, whose lemma introduces the text as “an exhortation of our Father Athanasius,” could belong to one of his Festal Letters.16

8 See the edition of the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church, ግብረ፡ ሕማማት. Addis Ababa 1957. On the Ethiopic version, see U. ZANETTI, Gəbrä Ḥəmamat, in: EAE 2 (2005), 725–728. For a comparison between the scriptural readings in Coptic and Ethiopic, cf. ZANETTI, Is the Ethiopian Holy Week Service Translated from Sahidic? (see fn. 4). 9 U. BOURIANT, Fragments memphitiques de divers livres inédits de l’Écriture et des instruc- tions pastorales de Pères de l’Église copte, in: RTPE 7 (1886), 82–94, here 88–92. 10 O. H. E. BURMESTER, The Homilies or Exhortations of the Holy Week Lectionary, in: Mus 45 (1932), 21–70. 11 On this and the other lectionary extracts attributed to Shenoute, see EMMEL, SLC, 86–87. The clavis coptica to which I refer here and elsewhere in this article is available at http://cmcl.aai.uni-hamburg.de/. 12 Parallel text in PG 49, 380, 373, 376. Cf. S. J. VOICU, Per una lista delle opere trasmesse in copto sotto il nome di Giovanni Crisostomo, in: FS ORLANDI, 575–610, here 578–579. 13 This spurious homily has survived in Sahidic, Arabic and Ethiopic. The Sahidic text is preserved in the Pierpont Morgan codex M 602. Description in DEPUYDT, Catalogue, 226–227, no. 116. 14 This text circulated under various authorships. CPG lists it under the name of Alexander of Alexandria. The extract in the lectionary parallels the Sahidic version published in E. A. W. BUDGE, Coptic Homilies in the Dialect of Upper Egypt. London 1910, 125. 15 BURMESTER, Homilies (see fn. 10), 23. 16 Ibid. I have not been able to identify this extract in the Coptic and Syriac versions of Athana- sius’ Festal Letters, although a couple of passages are quite similar. Quotations from the Physiologus in a Homily of the Coptic Holy Week Lectionary 679

As far as I am aware, only one supplementary extract has been identified after Burmester’s article. Thus, Tim Vivian identified no. 8 as an extract from the homily De Baptismo Christi (CPG 1660; clavis coptica 0309) attributed to Peter of Alexandria.17 In the present article, I will analyze yet another Patristic extract in the Coptic Holy Week lectionary, namely Burmester’s no. 21. The lemma attributes the homily in question to Athanasius of Alexandria. I will point out that the passage is actually formed of three separate quotations from the Physiologus.

1. Ps.-Athanasius of Alexandria (BURMESTER no. 21)

The extract analyzed hereby appears in almost all Bohairic manuscripts of the Holy Week lectionary examined by Burmester. Additionally, this text has survived also in Arabic18 and Ge‘ez19 translations. However, as there are no significant variant readings in these versions, I give below only Burmester’s edition of the Bohairic, followed by my own translation into English.20 The homily is still read in the Coptic Church, both in Coptic and Arabic, at the eleventh hour of the Good Friday.

ⲟⲩⲕⲁⲑⲏⲕⲉⲥⲓⲥ ⲙⲡⲉⲛⲓⲱⲧ ⲉⲑⲟⲩⲁⲃ A catechesis (kaqh,chsij) of our holy father ⲁⲑⲁⲛⲁⲥⲓⲟⲥ. Athanasius. ⲥⲥϧⲏⲟⲩⲧ ⲅⲁⲣ ⲙⲡⲁⲓⲣⲏϯ ϧⲉⲛⲛⲓⲅⲣⲁⲫⲏ‧ For (ga,r) it is written in the Scriptures (grafh,) ϫⲉ ⲉϣⲱⲡ ⲛⲉⲛⲯⲩⲭⲏ‧ ⲙⲏⲣ ⲉϧⲟⲩⲛ thus: “If our souls (yuch,) are bound to the Law ⲉⲡⲓⲛⲟⲙⲟⲥ‧ ⲛⲧⲉⲫϯ‧ ⲙⲡⲁⲣⲉⲛⲓⲇⲩⲛⲁⲙⲓⲥ (no,moj) of God, the powers (du,namij) of darkness ⲛⲧⲉⲭⲁⲕⲓ‧ ϣϫⲉⲙϫⲟⲙ ⲉⲣⲟⲛ‧ ⲁⲩϣⲁⲛ- do not have strength over us, but (de,) if we are ⲉⲣⲥⲁⲃⲟⲗ ⲇⲉ ⲙⲫϯ‧ ϣⲁⲩⲁⲙⲁϩⲓ ⲉϩⲣⲏⲓ far from God, they rule over us.” ⲉϫⲱⲛ‧ ϣⲁϥϫⲟⲥ ⲟⲛ ϫⲉ ⲛⲑⲟⲕ ⲇⲉ ⲱ ⲫⲣⲱⲙⲓ It says also, “You, O (w=) man that wants to be ⲉⲑⲟⲩⲱϣ ⲉⲛⲟϩⲉⲙ ⲧⲥⲁⲃⲟⲕ ⲉⲛⲉⲃⲓ saved, teach yourself to swim in the depth of the ϧⲉⲛⲡϣⲱⲕ ⲛϯⲙⲉⲧⲣⲁⲙⲁⲟ‧ ⲛⲉⲙϯⲥⲟⲫⲓⲁ‧ wealth and wisdom (-sofi,a) of God. Spread forth ⲛⲧⲉⲫϯ‧ ⲫⲱⲣϣ ⲛⲛⲉⲕϫⲓϫ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ⲙⲡⲧⲩⲡⲟⲥ your hands in the figure (tu,poj) of the Cross

17 T. VIVIAN, St. Peter of Alexandria: Bishop and Martyr (Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 3). Philadelphia 1988, 221. Cf. also B. PEARSON, T. VIVIAN, Two Coptic Homilies Attributed to Saint Peter of Alexandria: On Riches, On the Epiphany (Corpus dei Manoscritti Copti Lettera- ri). Rome 1993, 150. The extract included in the Holy Week lectionary parallels ibid. 172–173. 18 There are many Coptic devotional printings in which this passage appears. See, e. g., Holy Pascha. Order of Holy Week Services in the Coptic Orthodox Church. Coptic – English – Arabic. Jersey City, NJ 2004, (no pagination). 19 Incipit of the Ge‘ez version reproduced in PROVERBIO, La recensione etiopica (see fn. 4), 103. 20 A French translation of this extract, based on MS 170 in the Coptic Museum, Cairo, appeared in J. MUYSER, Le culte des Trois Saints Jeunes Gens chez les Coptes I, in: Les cahiers coptes 6 (1954), 17–31, here 23 (with photographic reproductions of the manuscript).

680 Alin Suciu

ⲙⲡⲓⲥ⳨ⲥ‧ ϫⲉ ⲉⲕⲉⲉⲣϫⲓⲛⲓⲟⲣ ϧⲉⲛⲫⲓⲟⲙ (stauro,j) so that you pass the great sea, which is ⲛⲛⲓϣϯ‧ ⲉⲧⲉ ⲫⲁⲓ ⲡⲉ ⲡⲁⲓⲉⲛⲉϩ ⲛⲧⲉⲕϣⲉ this age, and arrive to God. The scandals ⲉⲣⲁⲧϥ ⲙⲫϯ‧ ⲛⲉⲥⲕⲁⲛⲇⲁⲗⲟⲛ ⲉⲧⲉ (ska,ndalon) for those who do not know (how) to ⲛⲥⲉⲥⲱⲟⲩⲛ ⲁⲛ ⲛⲛⲉⲃⲓ‧ ⲛⲉ ⲛⲏ ⲉⲑⲙⲟϣⲓ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ swim, those who walk outside the catholic ⲉϯⲕⲁⲑⲟⲗⲓⲕⲏ ⲛⲉⲕⲕⲗⲏⲥⲓⲁ‧ ⲉⲩϣⲓⲛⲓ ⲥⲁⲃⲟⲗ Church (kaqolikh, evkklhsi,a) searching outside ⲙⲫⲛⲁϩϯ‧ ⲉⲧⲉ ⲛⲁⲓ ⲛⲉ ϯⲡⲟⲣⲛⲓⲁ‧ the faith, are fornication (pornei,a), slander ϯⲕⲁⲧⲁⲗⲁⲗⲓⲁ‧ ϯⲙⲉⲧⲙⲁⲓϩⲁⲧ‧ ⲉⲧⲉ ⲑⲛⲟⲩⲛⲓ (katalali,a) (and) love of money, which is the ⲙⲡⲉⲧϩⲱⲟⲩ ⲛⲓⲃⲉⲛ ⲧⲉ‧ ⲫⲙⲏⲓⲛⲓ ⲅⲁⲣ root of all evil. For (ga,r) the sign of the Cross ⲙⲡⲓⲥ⳨ⲥ‧ ⲉϥⲫⲱⲣϣ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ⲉϫⲉⲛⲡⲓⲥⲱⲛⲧ (stauro,j) spreads over every creation. If the sun ⲧⲏⲣϥ‧ ⲁⲣⲉϣⲧⲉⲙⲫⲣⲏ ⲫⲱⲣϣ ⲛⲛⲉϥⲁⲕⲧⲓⲛ does not spread forth its rays (avkti,j), it is not ⲉⲃⲟⲗ‧ ⲙⲙⲟⲛ ϣϫⲟⲙ ⲙⲙⲟϥ‧ ⲉⲉⲣⲟⲩⲱⲓⲛⲓ‧ able to illuminate and if the moon does not ⲟⲩⲟϩ ⲁⲣⲉϣⲧⲉⲙⲡⲓⲓⲟϩ ⲫⲱⲣϣ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ spread forth its two horns, it is not able to ⲛⲛⲉϥⲧⲁⲡ ⲃ‧ ⲙⲡⲁϥⲉⲣⲟⲩⲱⲓⲛⲓ‧ ⲟⲙⲉⲟⲥ ⲛⲓ- illuminate. Likewise (o`moi,wj), if the birds of the ϩⲁⲗⲁϯ ⲛⲧⲉⲧⲫⲉ‧ ⲁⲩϣⲧⲉⲙⲫⲱⲣϣ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ‧ sky do not spread forth their wings, they are not ⲛⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉⲛϩ ⲙⲡⲁⲩϣϩⲁⲗⲁⲓ‧ ⲟⲙⲉⲟⲥ ⲟⲛ‧ able to fly. Likewise (o`moi,wj) again, if the ships ⲛⲓⲕⲉⲉϫⲏⲟⲩ ⲁⲩϣⲧⲉⲙⲫⲱⲣϣ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ do not spread forth their sail, they cannot ⲛⲧⲟⲩⲗⲁⲩⲟ‧ ⲙⲡⲁⲩϣⲉⲣϩⲱⲧ‧ ϩⲏⲡ ⲡⲉ ⲓⲥ navigate. Behold, by spreading forth his hands, ⲙⲱⲩⲥⲏⲥ ⲡⲓⲁⲣⲭⲏ ⲙⲡⲣⲟⲫⲏⲧⲏⲥ ⲉⲧⲁϥ- Moses the arch-prophet (avrch, + profh,thj) ⲫⲱⲣϣ ⲛⲛⲉϥϫⲓϫ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ‧ ⲁϥϭⲣⲟ defeated Amalek, Daniel was safe in the pit ⲉⲡⲓⲁⲙⲁⲗⲏⲕ‧ ⲇⲁⲛⲓⲏⲗ ⲁϥⲛⲟϩⲉⲙ ϧⲉⲛ- (la,kkoj) of the lions, Jonah in the belly of the ⲫⲗⲁⲕⲕⲟⲥ ⲛⲛⲓⲙⲟⲩⲓ‧ ⲓⲱⲛⲁⲥ‧ ϧⲉⲛⲑⲛⲉϫⲓ whale (kh/toj), being thrown to the beasts ⲙⲡⲓⲕⲏⲧⲟⲥ‧ ⲑⲉⲕⲗⲁ‧ ϧⲉⲛⲡϫⲓⲛⲑⲣⲟⲩϩⲓⲧⲥ (qhri,on), Thecla was saved by the figure (tu,poj) ⲉⲛⲓⲑⲏⲣⲓⲟⲛ‧ ⲁⲥⲛⲟϩⲉⲙ ϩⲓⲧⲉⲛⲡⲧⲩⲡⲟⲥ ⲙⲡⲓ- of the Cross (stauro,j), Susanna from the hand of ⲥ⳨ⲥ‧ ⲥⲟⲩⲥⲁⲛⲛⲁ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ϧⲉⲛⲧϫⲓϫ ⲛⲛⲓ- the elders (presbu,teroj), Judith from the hand of ⲡⲣⲉⲥⲃⲩⲧⲉⲣⲟⲥ‧ ⲓⲟⲩⲇⲓⲑ‧ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ϧⲉⲛⲧϫⲓϫ Holofernes, the Three Saints (a[gioj) from the ⲛⲁⲗⲟⲫⲉⲣⲛⲏⲥ‧ ⲡⲓⲅ ⲛⲁⲅⲓⲟⲥ‧ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ϧⲉⲛϯϩⲣⲱ fiery furnace. All these were saved by the figure ⲛⲭⲣⲱⲙ ⲉⲑⲙⲟϩ ⲛⲁⲓ ⲧⲏⲣⲟⲩ ⲁⲩⲛⲟϩⲉⲙ (tu,poj) of the Cross (stauro,j).” ϧⲉⲛⲡⲧⲩⲡⲟⲥ ⲙⲡⲓⲥ⳨ⲥ ϣⲁϥϫⲟⲥ ⲟⲛ‧ ϫⲉ ⲙⲁⲣⲉⲡⲉⲕⲙⲁ ⲛⲟⲩⲱϩ It says also: “Let your dwelling-place be in a ϣⲱⲡⲓ ϧⲉⲛⲟⲩⲙⲁ ⲛⲟⲩⲱⲧ‧ ⲉⲧⲉ ⲑⲁⲓ ⲧⲉ single place, namely the Church (evkklhsi,a), to be ϯⲉⲕⲕⲗⲏⲥⲓⲁ‧ ⲉⲕϭⲓⲧⲣⲟⲫⲏ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ‧ ϧⲉⲛ- nourished (-trofh,) by the words of the Scriptures ⲛⲓⲥⲁϫⲓ ⲛⲧⲉⲛⲓⲅⲣⲁⲫⲏ‧ ⲛⲉⲙⲡⲓⲱⲓⲕ (grafh,), the heavenly (evpoura,nioj) bread and the ⲛⲉⲡⲟⲩⲣⲁⲛⲓⲟⲛ ⲛⲉⲙⲡⲓⲥⲛⲟϥ ⲛⲧⲉⲡⲭⲥ‧ blood of Christ, fortifying yourself at all times ⲉⲕϯⲛⲟⲙϯ ⲛⲁⲕ ⲛⲥⲏⲟⲩ ⲛⲓⲃⲉⲛ ϧⲉⲛ- with the words of the Scripture (grafh,).” ⲛⲉⲛⲥⲁϫⲓ ⲛϯⲅⲣⲁⲫⲏ

As can be observed, the text attributed to Athanasius is formed of three separate quotations. The first of them is introduced by the words “For it is written in the Scriptures thus” (ⲥⲥϧⲏⲟⲩⲧ ⲅⲁⲣ ⲙⲡⲁⲓⲣⲏϯ ϧⲉⲛⲛⲓⲅⲣⲁⲫⲏ). The other two begin with “it says also” (ϣⲁϥϫⲟⲥ ⲟⲛ). This implies that all three quotations are from the same source, which the author calls simply “the Scriptures” (ⲛⲓⲅⲣⲁⲫⲏ). As I have already said, the quotations are taken from three different chapters of the Physiologus. More precisely, the first quotation is from the chapter about Quotations from the Physiologus in a Homily of the Coptic Holy Week Lectionary 681 the Peridexion tree (chap. 34 of the Greek version), the second, which is the most extensive, comes from the chapter concerning the Ibis (chap. 40 of the Greek version), while the third has been extracted from the chapter about the Heron bird (chap. 47 of the Greek version). In the following lines, I will analyze the three quotations and their literary connections with the various versions of the Physiologus.21 1.1. The Peridexion Tree The first quotation comes from the chapter concerning the Peridexion tree. According to the Physiologus, this tree grows in India. The Peridexion is a dwelling place for doves, which are eating its sweet fruits. A snake encircles the tree, lying in wait to eat the birds that are leaving its branches. The moralizing part of this chapter compares those who leave the teaching of the church with the doves who wander away from the tree and end up eaten by the serpent. The versions in various languages of the chapter about the Peridexion offer different redactions of the same basic text. However, none of them corresponds exactly to the Bohairic. Therefore, it is not clear if Ps.-Athanasius quoted from a lost version of the Physiologus or, rather, if the Coptic is merely a paraphrase of the original.

BURMESTER no. 21 – first quotation Physiologus Graecus (ed. SBORDONE)22 ⲉϣⲱⲡ ⲛⲉⲛⲯⲩⲭⲏ‧ ⲙⲏⲣ ⲉϧⲟⲩⲛ ⲉⲡⲓⲛⲟⲙⲟⲥ‧ eva.n ou=n kai. h`mei/j avntecw,meqa th/j sofi,aj ⲛⲧⲉⲫϯ‧ ⲙⲡⲁⲣⲉⲛⲓⲇⲩⲛⲁⲙⲓⲥ ⲛⲧⲉⲭⲁⲕⲓ‧ kai. tou.j karpou.j tou/ Pneu,matoj ϣϫⲉⲙϫⲟⲙ ⲉⲣⲟⲛ‧ ⲁⲩϣⲁⲛⲉⲣⲥⲁⲃⲟⲗ ⲇⲉ ⲙⲫϯ‧ evsqi,wmen( oi[ eivsi cara,( eivrh,nh( ϣⲁⲩⲁⲙⲁϩⲓ ⲉϩⲣⲏⲓ ⲉϫⲱⲛ‧ evgkra,teia( makroqumi,a( ouvk evggi,zei h`mi/n o` ponhro.j dia,boloj\ eva.n de. evn toi/j tou/ sko,touj pra,gmasin avpoplanhqw/men( a[ evti pornei,a( moicei,a( eivdwlolatri,a( pa,qh( evpiqumi,ai kakai. kai. pleonexi,a( eu`rw.n h`ma/j o` dia,boloj mh. rapame,nontaj tw/| th/j zwh/j xu,lw|( euvko,lwj avnairei/)

21 My investigation is based upon the Greek, Latin, Syriac, Ethiopic, Georgian and Armenian recensions of the Physiologus. The following editions of the Arabic and Old Slavonic versions remained inaccessible to me: G. SVANE, Славянский Физиолог (александрийская редакция). По рукописи Королевской библиотеки в Копенгагене Ny Kongelig Samling 147b (Arbejds- papirer 1986, nr. 6–7). Aarhus 1986; G. SVANE, Славянский Физиолог (византийская редакция). По рукописи Королевской библиотеки в Копенгагене Ny Kongelig Samling 553c (Arbejdspapirer, 1987, nr. 1–2). Aarhus 1987; S. WENTKER, Der arabische Physiologus. Edition, Übersetzung, Kommentar. Vienna 2004. 22 For the present research, I used the Greek text published in F. SBORDONE, Physiologus. Milan 1936. An English translation of the Greek text on the Peridexion tree is available in R. M. GRANT, Early Christians and Animals. London 1999, 66.

682 Alin Suciu

On the basis of the comparison between the two texts, it can be concluded that the Coptic is quite different from the Greek redactio prima edited by Francesco Sbordone.23 It is especially interesting to note that the Greek version contains a series of virtues and vices that may save or doom the man. The fact that the sets of virtues and vices are lacking in a few other recensions of the Physiologus, might be a proof that they are editorial glossae, added in order to make the text more explicit. For example, the Latin versio Y does not contain them: uide ergo, o homo, ne postquam acceperis spiritum sanctum (hoc est spiritalem columbam intellegibilem, de celo descendentem et manentem super te), ne fias foris a deitate, alienus a patre et filio et spiritu sancto, et draco te interimat (hoc est diabulus).24 The differences between the Coptic text of Ps.-Athanasius and the Greek version of the Physiologus published by Sbordone show that the two texts belong to different textual families. In some regards, our text harmonizes better with other recensions of the Physiologus. For example, the lectio ⲉϣⲱⲡ ⲛⲉⲛⲯⲩⲭⲏ‧ ⲙⲏⲣ ⲉϧⲟⲩⲛ ⲉⲡⲓⲛⲟⲙⲟⲥ‧ ⲛⲧⲉⲫϯ‧ ⲙⲡⲁⲣⲉⲛⲓⲇⲩⲛⲁⲙⲓⲥ ⲛⲧⲉⲭⲁⲕⲓ‧ ϣϫⲉⲙϫⲟⲙ ⲉⲣⲟⲛ‧ (“If our souls are bound to the Law of God, the powers of darkness do not have strength over us”) is close to what we find in the Greek version (versio P) published by A. Karnejev after a manuscript in the Synodal Library of the Moscow Patriarchate, eva.n e;ch|j to. evpoura,nion a[gion pneu/ma( ouv dunh,setai o` dia,boloj evpi. se,,25 and in Armenian, Ã¿ áõÝÇóÇë ½»ñÏÝ³õáñ Ñá·ÇÝ, ãÏ³ñ¿ Ù»ñÓ»Ý³É ³é ù»½ ë³ï³Ý³Û (“if you have the heavenly Spirit, Satan cannot draw near you”).26 Furthermore, the reading “if we are far (literally, outside) God” (ⲁⲩϣⲁⲛⲉⲣⲥⲁⲃⲟⲗ ⲇⲉ ⲙⲫϯ‧) is supported by the Latin ne fias foris a deitate. 1.2. The Ibis The comparison between the Bohairic text published by Burmester and the Greek text of the chapter about the Ibis in the Physiologus reveals a series of textual disagreements, albeit over all there is no doubt that they represent two recensions of the same text.

23 Another relatively similar passage appears in the chapter about the crow: “If then we have the husband (i. e., Christ) in our heart, the adulterous devil does not enter; but if the male word leaves our soul, the adversary slips in” (trans. GRANT) (evan ou=n kai. h`mei/j e;cwmen to.n a;ndra evn kardi,a|( ouvk eivsbai,nei o` moico.j dia,boloj\ eva.n de. evkbh/| o` avndrei/oj lo,goj evk th/j yuch/j h`mw/n( eivsdu,nei o` antikei,menoj\). 24 F. J. CARMODY, Physiologus Latinus Versio Y, in: UCPCP 12,7 (1941), 95–134, here 117. 25 A. KARNEJEV, Der Physiologus der Moskauer Synodalbibliothek. Ein Beitrag zur Lösung der Frage nach vor Vorlage des armenischen und eines alten lateinischen Physiologus, in: BZ 3 (1894), 26–63, here 55. 26 Text and translation taken from G. MURADYAN, Physiologus. The Greek and Armenian Versions with a Study of Translation Technique (HUAS 6). Leuven 2005, 167, 196. Cf. also the Georgian version, G. GRAF, Der georgische Physiologos, in: Caucasica 2 (1925), 93–114, here 112. Quotations from the Physiologus in a Homily of the Coptic Holy Week Lectionary 683

BURMESTER no. 21 – second Physiologus Graecus (ed. 27 quotation SBORDONE) Peri. i;bewj VAka,qarto,j evsti kata. to.n No,mon h` i=bij) kolumba/n ouvk oi=de( avlla. para. ta. cei,lh tw/n potamw/n kai. tw/n limnw/n ne,metai( kai. ouv du,natai eivselqei/n eivj ta. ba,qh( o[pou oi` kaqaroi. ivcqu,ej nh,contai( avllV o[pou ta. avka,qarta ivcqu,dia auvli,zontai) ⲛⲑⲟⲕ ⲇⲉ ⲱ ⲫⲣⲱⲙⲓ ⲉⲑⲟⲩⲱϣ ⲉⲛⲟϩⲉⲙ Ma,qe ou=n kai. su. noerw/j kolumba/n( i[na ⲧⲥⲁⲃⲟⲕ ⲉⲛⲉⲃⲓ ϧⲉⲛⲡϣⲱⲕ ⲛϯⲙⲉⲧⲣⲁⲙⲁⲟ‧ e;lqh|j evpi. to.n noero.n baqu.n potamo,n( eivj ⲛⲉⲙϯⲥⲟⲫⲓⲁ‧ ⲛⲧⲉⲫϯ‧ ⲫⲱⲣϣ ⲛⲛⲉⲕϫⲓϫ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ba,qoj plou,tou kai. sofi,aj kai. gnw,sewj ⲙⲡⲧⲩⲡⲟⲥ ⲙⲡⲓⲥ⳨ⲥ‧ ϫⲉ ⲉⲕⲉⲉⲣϫⲓⲛⲓⲟⲣ ϧⲉⲛⲫⲓⲟⲙ Qeou/) eiv mh. ga.r ta.j du,o cei/raj evktenei/j ⲛⲛⲓϣϯ‧ ⲉⲧⲉ ⲫⲁⲓ ⲡⲉ ⲡⲁⲓⲉⲛⲉϩ ⲛⲧⲉⲕϣⲉ ⲉⲣⲁⲧϥ kai. poih,seij to. shmei/on tou/ staurou/( ouv ⲙⲫϯ‧ ⲛⲉⲥⲕⲁⲛⲇⲁⲗⲟⲛ ⲉⲧⲉ ⲛⲥⲉⲥⲱⲟⲩⲛ ⲁⲛ dunh,sei pera/sai th.n tou/ bi,ou qa,lassan) ⲛⲛⲉⲃⲓ‧ ⲛⲉ ⲛⲏ ⲉⲑⲙⲟϣⲓ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ⲉϯⲕⲁⲑⲟⲗⲓⲕⲏ o` ga.r tu,poj tou/ staurou/ evpi. pa,nta ta. ⲛⲉⲕⲕⲗⲏⲥⲓⲁ‧ ⲉⲩϣⲓⲛⲓ ⲥⲁⲃⲟⲗ ⲙⲫⲛⲁϩϯ‧ ⲉⲧⲉ ⲛⲁⲓ kti,smata suntei,nei\ o` h[lioj( eva.n mh. ⲛⲉ ϯⲡⲟⲣⲛⲓⲁ‧ ϯⲕⲁⲧⲁⲗⲁⲗⲓⲁ‧ ϯⲙⲉⲧⲙⲁⲓϩⲁⲧ‧ evktei,nei auvtou/ ta.j avkti/naj( ouv du,natai ⲉⲧⲉ ⲑⲛⲟⲩⲛⲓ ⲙⲡⲉⲧϩⲱⲟⲩ ⲛⲓⲃⲉⲛ ⲧⲉ‧ ⲫⲙⲏⲓⲛⲓ la,myai\ h` selh,nh( eva.n mh. evktei,nh| auvth/j ⲅⲁⲣ ⲙⲡⲓⲥ⳨ⲥ‧ ⲉϥⲫⲱⲣϣ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ⲉϫⲉⲛⲡⲓⲥⲱⲛⲧ to. dike,raton( ouv la,mpei\ peteino.n( eva.n ⲧⲏⲣϥ‧ ⲁⲣⲉϣⲧⲉⲙⲫⲣⲏ ⲫⲱⲣϣ ⲛⲛⲉϥⲁⲕⲧⲓⲛ mh. evktei,nh| au`tou/ ta.j pte,rugaj( ouvc ⲉⲃⲟⲗ‧ ⲙⲙⲟⲛ ϣϫⲟⲙ ⲙⲙⲟϥ‧ ⲉⲉⲣⲟⲩⲱⲓⲛⲓ‧ ⲟⲩⲟϩ i[ptatai) Mwu?sh/j( evktei,naj ta.j cei/raj( ⲁⲣⲉϣⲧⲉⲙⲡⲓⲓⲟϩ ⲫⲱⲣϣ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ⲛⲛⲉϥⲧⲁⲡ ⲃ‧ avnei/le to.n VAmalh,k( Danih.l tou.j ⲙⲡⲁϥⲉⲣⲟⲩⲱⲓⲛⲓ‧ ⲟⲙⲉⲟⲥ ⲛⲓϩⲁⲗⲁϯ ⲛⲧⲉⲧⲫⲉ‧ le,ontaj) VIwna/j evn th|/ koili,a| tou/ kh,touj( ⲁⲩϣⲧⲉⲙⲫⲱⲣϣ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ‧ ⲛⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉⲛϩ ⲙⲡⲁⲩ- Qe,kla evn puri. kai. fw,kaij evblh,qh( kai. o` ϣϩⲁⲗⲁⲓ‧ ⲟⲙⲉⲟⲥ ⲟⲛ‧ ⲛⲓⲕⲉⲉϫⲏⲟⲩ ⲁⲩϣⲧⲉⲙ- tu,poj tou/ staurou/ auvth.n die,swse) ⲫⲱⲣϣ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ⲛⲧⲟⲩⲗⲁⲩⲟ‧ ⲙⲡⲁⲩϣⲉⲣϩⲱⲧ‧ Swsa,nna evk tw/n presbute,rwn( VIoudh.q evk ϩⲏⲡⲡⲉ ⲓⲥ ⲙⲱⲩⲥⲏⲥ ⲡⲓⲁⲣⲭⲏ ⲙⲡⲣⲟⲫⲏⲧⲏⲥ tou/ ~Olofe,rnou kai. Esqh.r evk tou/ ⲉⲧⲁϥⲫⲱⲣϣ ⲛⲛⲉϥϫⲓϫ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ‧ ⲁϥϭⲣⲟ ⲉⲡⲓⲁⲙⲁ- VArtaxe,rxou( kai. oi` trei/j pai/dej evn th/| ⲗⲏⲕ‧ ⲇⲁⲛⲓⲏⲗ ⲁϥⲛⲟϩⲉⲙ ϧⲉⲛⲫⲗⲁⲕⲕⲟⲥ kami,nw| tou/ puro.j @evn th/| pi,stei# ⲛⲛⲓⲙⲟⲩⲓ‧ ⲓⲱⲛⲁⲥ‧ ϧⲉⲛⲑⲛⲉϫⲓ ⲙⲡⲓⲕⲏⲧⲟⲥ‧ diesw,qhsan( kai. to. cei/ron pa,ntwn i=bij ⲑⲉⲕⲗⲁ‧ ϧⲉⲛⲡϫⲓⲛⲑⲣⲟⲩϩⲓⲧⲥ ⲉⲛⲓⲑⲏⲣⲓⲟⲛ‧ ))) ta. de. gennh,mata tw/n a`martwlw/n ⲁⲥⲛⲟϩⲉⲙ ϩⲓⲧⲉⲛⲡⲧⲩⲡⲟⲥ ⲙⲡⲓⲥ⳨ⲥ‧ ⲥⲟⲩⲥⲁⲛⲛⲁ a`marti,ai ei`si,n) ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ϧⲉⲛⲧϫⲓϫ ⲛⲛⲓⲡⲣⲉⲥⲃⲩⲧⲉⲣⲟⲥ‧ ⲓⲟⲩⲇⲓⲑ‧ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ϧⲉⲛⲧϫⲓϫ ⲛⲁⲗⲟⲫⲉⲣⲛⲏⲥ‧ ⲡⲓⲅ ⲛⲁⲅⲓⲟⲥ‧ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ϧⲉⲛϯϩⲣⲱ ⲛⲭⲣⲱⲙ ⲉⲑⲙⲟϩ ⲛⲁⲓ ⲧⲏⲣⲟⲩ ⲁⲩⲛⲟϩⲉⲙ ϧⲉⲛⲡⲧⲩⲡⲟⲥ ⲙⲡⲓⲥ⳨ⲥ As can be seen in the table above, the author of the sermon attributed to Athanasius quoted only the moralizing part of the Ibis chapter, leaving aside the

27 For a translation into English, cf. GRANT, Early Christians (see fn. 22), 68–69.

684 Alin Suciu description of the bird.28 The Bohairic text begins with the expression “But you, O man” (ⲛⲑⲟⲕ ⲇⲉ ⲱ ⲫⲣⲱⲙⲓ), which is lacking in the edited Greek versions of the parallel text. However, it is possible that the version used by Ps.-Athanasius actually contained this expression since the equivalent su,( w= a;nqrwpe is common in the Physiologus. The expression occurs no less than five times in the Greek redactio prima published by Sbordone.29 Moreover, the Latin versio B introduces the same passage by the words tu igitur, Christiane homo, which closely resembles what we read in Ps.-Athanasius.30 The Coptic text continues with a long passage which is much shorter in the parallel Greek version. However, the missing portion of the text is recoverable elsewhere, namely in the Latin version Y.31 This clearly indicates that this is not a development due to the pen of Ps.-Athanasius, but rather that both the Coptic and the Latin version Y rely upon a similar Greek source. Physiologus Graecus Ps.-Athanasius Physiologus Latinus – (ed. SBORDONE) Versio Y (ed. CARMODY) eiv mh. ga.r ta.j du,o ⲫⲱⲣϣ ⲛⲛⲉⲕϫⲓϫ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ Nisi enim duas manus cei/raj evktenei/j kai. ⲙⲡⲧⲩⲡⲟⲥ ⲙⲡⲓⲥ⳨ⲥ‧ ϫⲉ extenderis et feceris typum poih,seij to. shmei/on ⲉⲕⲉⲉⲣϫⲓⲛⲓⲟⲣ ϧⲉⲛⲫⲓⲟⲙ crucis, non poteris pertran- tou/ staurou/( ouv ⲛⲛⲓϣϯ‧ ⲉⲧⲉ ⲫⲁⲓ ⲡⲉ ⲡⲁⲓⲉⲛⲉϩ sire mare; et nisi tu uolueris dunh,sei pera/sai th.n ⲛⲧⲉⲕϣⲉ ⲉⲣⲁⲧϥ ⲙⲫϯ‧ pertransire seculum ad deum tou/ bi,ou qa,lassan) o` ⲛⲉⲥⲕⲁⲛⲇⲁⲗⲟⲛ ⲉⲧⲉ ⲛⲥⲉ- per typum crucis, omnia ga.r tu,poj tou/ staurou/ ⲥⲱⲟⲩⲛ ⲁⲛ ⲛⲛⲉⲃⲓ‧ ⲛⲉ ⲛⲏ scandala non uitabis: nescient evpi. pa,nta ta. kti,smata ⲉⲑⲙⲟϣⲓ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ⲉϯⲕⲁⲑⲟⲗⲓⲕⲏ enim natare neque orare suntei,nei\ ⲛⲉⲕⲕⲗⲏⲥⲓⲁ‧ ⲉⲩϣⲓⲛⲓ ⲥⲁⲃⲟⲗ scientes, foris depascuntur ab ⲙⲫⲛⲁϩϯ‧ ⲉⲧⲉ ⲛⲁⲓ ⲛⲉ ecclesia. Foris autem a fide ϯⲡⲟⲣⲛⲓⲁ‧ ϯⲕⲁⲧⲁⲗⲁⲗⲓⲁ‧ ϯⲙⲉⲧ- sunt fornicationes, moechiae, ⲙⲁⲓϩⲁⲧ‧ ⲉⲧⲉ ⲑⲛⲟⲩⲛⲓ ⲙⲡⲉⲧ- detractationes, cupiditates. ϩⲱⲟⲩ ⲛⲓⲃⲉⲛ ⲧⲉ‧ ⲫⲙⲏⲓⲛⲓ ⲅⲁⲣ Radix enim omnium malo- ⲙⲡⲓⲥ⳨ⲥ‧ ⲉϥⲫⲱⲣϣ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ rum est cupiditas: etenim ⲉϫⲉⲛⲡⲓⲥⲱⲛⲧ ⲧⲏⲣϥ‧ typus crucis super omnem creaturam est. At a first glance, the comparison between the Bohairic and the Latin versio Y, suggests that the Coptic translator might have occasionally corrupted the meaning of the Greek text, since the Latin rendering sounds more fluent and logical. However, it is also possible that the Bohairic represents the more literal translation, and that the Latin translator has attempted to explicitate a vague or problematic passage.

28 This chapter is analyzed in H. SCHNEIDER, Das Ibis-Kapitel im ‘Physiologus’, in: VC 56 (2002), 151–164. 29 Cf. Physiologus chap. 2, 6, 11, 28, 31. 30 F. J. CARMODY, Physiologus Latinus. Éditions préliminaires versio B. Paris 1939, 28. 31 CARMODY, Physiologus Latinus Versio Y (see fn. 24). Quotations from the Physiologus in a Homily of the Coptic Holy Week Lectionary 685

Further, the Coptic text enumerates four examples meant to convey the im- portance and the omnipresence of the sign of the Cross: If the sun does not spread forth its rays, it is not able to illuminate and if the moon does not spread forth its two horns, it is not able to illuminate. Likewise, if the birds of the sky do not spread forth their wings, they are not able to fly. Likewise again, if the ships do not spread forth their sail, they cannot navigate. Remarkably, the parallel Greek text contains only three such examples: o` h[lioj( eva.n mh. evktei,nh|( au`tou/ ta.j avkti/naj( ouv du,natai la,myai\ h` selh,nh( eva.n mh. evktei,nh| auvth/j to. dike,raton( ouv la,mpei\ peteino.n( eva.n mh. evktei,nh| au`tou/ ta.j pte,rugaj( ouvc i[ptatai (ed. SBORDONE). However, although the fourth example, which concerns the ships that must spread their sails in order to navigate, does not appear in the Greek version, it is present in the Latin translations: Nauis quoque, nisi extensum fuerit uelum eius cum uelificat, uentis flantibus non mouetur ad nauigandum (versio Y, ed. CARMODY). Finally, this quotation from the Physiologus ends with a series of examples drawn from the Old Testament and the Acts of Paul and Thecla. These examples demonstrate the salvific role of the sign of the Cross: Behold, by spreading forth his hands, Moses the arch-prophet defeated Amalek, Daniel was safe in the pit of the lions, Jonah in the belly of the whale, Thecla was saved by the figure of the Cross from being thrown to the beasts, Susanna from the hand of the elders, Judith from the hand of Holofernes, the Three Saints from the fiery furnace. The Greek text adds to these the example of Esther, who escaped from the hands of Artaxerxes, but this part is lacking in Ps.-Athanasius.32 The aforementioned passages prove that the Coptic quotation from the Physiologus depends on a version of the chapter about the Ibis which might be lost in Greek, but which survived in Latin translations, notably that of the so- called versio Y.

32 On the other hand, the Greek text published by D. Offermanns after Pierpont Morgan 397 and Ambrosianus graec., A 41 sup. mentions the examples of Moses, Daniel, Susanna and Thecla. See D. OFFERMANNS, Der Physiologus nach den Handschriften G und M (BKP 22). Meisenheim am Glan 1966, 132.

686 Alin Suciu

1.3. The Heron Bird (Coot) The third quotation comes from the chapter concerning the heron bird, or the coot (Greek chap. 47). The Physiologus says that this bird has only one nest and that it eats and sleeps in the same place. The Christians should remain, like the heron bird, in a single place, that is, the Church, avoiding the heretical teach- ings. As with the quotations analyzed above, this one does not contain either the description of the animal to which it refers, but only the moralizing part (and even this partly). BURMESTER no. 21 – third Physiologus Graecus (ed. 33 quotation SBORDONE) Peri. evrwdiou/ peteinou/ Ei=pen o` Yalmw|do,j\ ¹tou/ evrwdiou/ h` katoiki,a h`gei/tai auvtw/n¹) o` de. Fusiolo,goj e;fh\ e;sti tou/to to. peteino.n pa,nu fro,nimon u`pe.r polla. peteina,) mi,an de. skh,nwsin e;cei kai. mi,an ma,ndran( ouv polla.j koi,taj zhtei/( avll’ o[pou eva.n kataskhnw,sh|( evkei/ kai. tre,fetai kai. koima/tai( avll’ ou;te nekro.n sw/ma trw,gei( ouvde. eivj pollou.j to,pouj avni,ptatai\ h` koi,th auvtou/ kai. h` trofh. eivj e[na to,pon evsti,n) ⲙⲁⲣⲉⲡⲉⲕⲙⲁ ⲛⲟⲩⲱϩ ϣⲱⲡⲓ ϧⲉⲛⲟⲩⲙⲁ Kai. su. ou=n( a;nqrwpe politeuo,mene( mh. ⲛⲟⲩⲱⲧ‧ ⲉⲧⲉ ⲑⲁⲓ ⲧⲉ ϯⲉⲕⲕⲗⲏⲥⲓⲁ‧ ⲉⲕ- zh,tei pollou.j to,pouj tw/n ai`retikw/n\ mi,a ϭⲓⲧⲣⲟⲫⲏ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ‧ ϧⲉⲛⲛⲓⲥⲁϫⲓ ⲛⲧⲉⲛⲓⲅⲣⲁⲫⲏ‧ soi e;stw koi,th( h` a`gi,a tou/ Qeou/ ⲛⲉⲙⲡⲓⲱⲓⲕ ⲛⲉⲡⲟⲩⲣⲁⲛⲓⲟⲛ ⲛⲉⲙⲡⲓⲥⲛⲟϥ VEkklhsi,a( kai. mi,a trofh,( o` a;rtoj o` avpo. ⲛⲧⲉⲡⲭⲥ‧ ⲉⲕϯⲛⲟⲙϯ ⲛⲁⲕ ⲛⲥⲏⲟⲩ ⲛⲓⲃⲉⲛ ouvranou/ kataba,j( o` Ku,rioj h`mw/n VIhsou/j ϧⲉⲛⲛⲉⲛⲥⲁϫⲓ ⲛϯⲅⲣⲁⲫⲏ Cristo,j( mhde. a[ptou didagma,twn nekrw/n( i[na o` evpoura,nioj a;rtoj eu;opto,j soi ge,nhtai( kai. mh. zh,tei pollou.j to,pouj tw/n e`terodo,xwn) The Coptic and Greek texts display again marked differences. As in the case of the quotation from the chapter concerning the Peridexion tree, at a first glance the Coptic is so different that it is difficult to recognize. However, the Latin version of the Physiologus preserves again some variant lections which are found also in Ps.-Athanasius. For example, the lectio ⲡⲓⲥⲛⲟϥ ⲛⲧⲉⲡⲭ̄̄ⲥ̄ appears in Latin (versions Y and B) as well: potum uero pretiosum sanguinem Christi.34 Similarly, ⲉⲕϯⲛⲟⲙϯ ⲛⲁⲕ ⲛⲥⲏⲟⲩ ⲛⲓⲃⲉⲛ ϧⲉⲛⲛⲉⲛⲥⲁϫⲓ ⲛϯⲅⲣⲁⲫⲏ (“fortifying yourself at all times with the

33 See the English translation of the Greek text in GRANT, Early Christians (see fn. 22), 71–72. 34 CARMODY, Physiologus Latinus Versio B (see fn. 30), 39; CARMODY, Physiologus Latinus Versio Y (see fn. 24), 123. Quotations from the Physiologus in a Homily of the Coptic Holy Week Lectionary 687 words of the Scripture”) does not have parallel elsewhere, but this expression seems to have some connection with what we find in Latin, which quotes at this point Mt 4:4, Non enim in solo pane uiuit homo, sed in omni uerbo Dei. The significant differences displayed by the text quoted by Ps.-Athanasius can probably be explained by the fact that the author knew a version of the Physiologus which is lost. In fact, this part of the chapter about the heron bird varies in the surviving versions of the Physiologus, which suggests that the section had an unstable textual tradition already in Greek. For example, the Ge‘ez version is, in its turn, different from the Greek and Latin: አንተሂ፡ ኢትኅሥሥ፡ ብዙኀ፡ መካናተ፡ ዘዐላውያን፡ አላ፡ ፩ይኩን፡ ምስካብከ፡ ወይእቱ፡ ቤተ፡ ክርስቲያን፡ ቅድስት፤ ወረደ፡ እንከ፡ እግዚእነ፡ ኢየሱስ፡ ክርስቶስ፡ ወመሀረ፡ ሕገ፡ ሰማያዊተ፡ ከመ፡ ንርከብ፡ ስብሐተ፡ ሰማያዌ፡ ወይኩን፡ ኅሊናነ፡ ውስተ፡ ሰማይ። But you, do not seek many places of the wicked, but only one be your bed, this being the holy Christian church. Therefore, our Lord Jesus Christ descended and taught the heavenly law so that we receive the heavenly glory and our mind to be in heaven.35 Thus, I think these are evidences that the differences between the Coptic text and the edited Greek Physiologus are not accidental. It is more likely to suppose that Ps.-Athanasius might depend on a different version of the Greek text.

2. Conclusion

The analysis of the Coptic text attributed to Athanasius of Alexandria, however brief, shows that the three quotations of which it is formed are taken from the Physiologus. The most marked differences appear in the quotation about the Peridexion tree. Being the case that the textual tradition of the Physiologus is highly diverse and rich, perhaps more research of the unpublished versions is required in order to establish which one is closer to Ps.-Athanasius. The exami- nation of the other two quotations has revealed that they are closer to the Latin (especially the so-called versio Y) than to the available Greek recensions. This suggests that the Latin version and that on which Ps.-Athanasius ultimately depends were made after a similar Greek text. As to the authorship of the text, I think the quotations from the Physiologus constitute evidence that it is unlikely to be a genuinely Athanasian composition. Although this Christian bestiary is usually considered to have been composed in Alexandria sometimes during the

35 Ethiopic text in F. HOMMEL, Die äthiopische Übersetzung des Physiologus, nach je einer Londoner, Pariser und Wiener Handschrift hrsg., verdeutscht und mit einer historischen Ein- leitung versehen. Leipzig 1877, 39, 94 (German translation). See also C. CONTI ROSSINI, Il ‘Fisiologo’ etiopico, in: Rassegna di Studi Etiopici 10 (1951), 5–51, here 50 (Italian translation from Ge‘ez).

688 Alin Suciu

4th century CE,36 thus, theoretically in circulation already during Athanasius’ lifetime, there is no evidence in his works that he was familiar with it. On the other hand, a source of the extract has not been successfully identified among the Coptic texts attributed to him. However, a survey of the Arabic and Ethiopic texts attributed to Athanasius might reveal one day the source of the extract. As far as I am aware, there is at least one other pseudo-Athanasian text, which has survived in Coptic, whose author seems to have known the Physiologus, namely the so-called Canons of Athanasius (CPG 2302; clavis coptica 0089). This text offers a series of precepts for the clergy, among which are interspersed passages of homiletic character. Even if the authenticity of this work cannot be proven, it enjoyed some popularity in the Egyptian Church. The full version has been preserved only in Arabic, but a fragmentary Sahidic version has survived اﻟﻨﺴﺮ اﻟﻐﯿﺮ ﻧﺎطﻖ ﻟﯿﺲ ﻟﮫ ﻏﯿﺮ اﻣﺮاة as well.37 Thus, Canon 8 of Ps.-Athanasius says that .(”the eagle, who does not have understanding,38 has only one wife“) واﺣﺪة According to Walter E. Crum, this is actually a reference to the chapter about the crow in the Physiologus.39 Another quotation from the Physiologus appears in a text possibly attributed to Athanasius, but this is more problematic. The writing to which I refer is the so- called Gnomai Concilii Nicaeni (clavis coptica 0021), which is preserved in several Sahidic codices.40 The gnomai contain a quotation from the chapter

36 Cf. e. g. U. TREU, Zur Datierung des Physiologus, in: ZNW 57 (1966), 101–104; M. J. CURLEY, Physiologus. Chicago, London 1979, xv–xxi. 37 The Arabic and Coptic versions are available in W. RIEDEL, W. E. CRUM, The Canons of Atha- nasius of Alexandria. The Arabic and Coptic Versions Edited and Translated with Introduc- tions, Notes and Appendices. London, Oxford 1904. The Coptic version was published by W. E. Crum after two fragmentary codices. Fragments of a third codex were published later in H. MUNIER, Mélanges de littérature copte I: Collection du Rév. E. C. Hoskyns, in: ASAE 19 (1920), 225–241, here 238–241. Munier thought that the fragments published by him, kept today in the collection of the Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, belonged to one of the codices identified by Crum, but my paleographical inspection of the material has not confirmed his assumption. ,.literally means “who is able to speak,” but I translated it according to the meaning, i. e اﻟﻨﺎطﻖ 38 “who is mindful/reasonable.” 39 This portion of the text is preserved only in Arabic, cf. RIEDEL, CRUM, Canons of Athanasius of Alexandria (see fn. 37), 16, fn. 87. 40 Published after a papyrus codex in the Egyptian Museum in Turin by E. REVILLOUT, Le Con- cile de Nicée, d’après les textes coptes. Exposition de foi. Gnomes de Saint Concile, in: JA 7th ser. 1 (1873), 234–264 (Sahidic text), 264–287 (French translation). The same manuscript was reedited in F. ROSSI, Trascrizione di alcuni testi copti tratti dai papiri del Muzeo egizio di Torino, in: MAST 36 (1884), 34–61 (Sahidic text), 84–92 (Italian translation). A couple of years later, Revillout published the same text according to a fragmentary parchment manuscript which belonged to the White Monastery, in Le Concile de Nicée, d’après les textes coptes et les diverses collections canoniques, in: JA 7th ser. 6 (1875), 257–266 (Sahidic text) reprinted in E. REVILLOUT, Le Concile de Nicée d’après les textes coptes et les diverses collections canoniques. Paris 1881, 63–72 (Sahidic text). Cf. also J. LAMMEYER, Die sogenannte Gnomen des Concils von Nicaea: ein homiletischer Traktat des 4. Jahrhunderts. Beirut 1912. Quotations from the Physiologus in a Homily of the Coptic Holy Week Lectionary 689 about the hyena in the Physiologus.41 In one of the manuscripts of this writing, a papyrus codex kept in the Egyptian Museum in Turin, the text apparently bears the title ⲁⲑⲁⲛⲁⲥⲓⲟⲩ ⲗⲟⲅⲟⲩ. However, it is not clear if this title represents the superscriptio of our text or, rather, the subscriptio of the previous, which is an anonymous life of Athanasius (clavis coptica 0408).42 As none of the other Sahidic witnesses of the Gnomai Concilii Nicaeni supports the hypothetical Athanasian authorship, I suspect that the title in the Turin papyrus actually refers to the previous work in the codex.43 This is the reason why I do not count the gnomai among the Coptic pseudo-Athanasian texts which quote the Physio- logus. Although no Coptic manuscript of the Physiologus is known to survive, many literary sources in this language contain quotations from it.44 It is nevertheless interesting to remark that the ancient bestiary has crept into the Coptic Holy Week lectionary, through quotations included in a homily attributed to Athanasius of Alexandria. Under this prestigious authorship, and without any indication as to their source, the passages in question are read even today during the Good Friday in Coptic and Ethiopian churches.

41 O. VON LEMM, Koptische Miscellen LXXXIV. Zum koptischen Physiologus 2, in: Bulletin de l’Académie Impériale des Sciences de St.-Pétersbourg 1910, 1097–1098 (reprint Leipzig 1972); A. VAN LANTSCHOOT, A propos du Physiologus, in: Coptic Studies in Honor of Walter Ewing Crum (The Bulletin of the Byzantine Institute 2). Boston 1950, 339–363, here 350. 42 Edition in ROSSI, Trascrizione di alcuni testi copti (see fn. 40), 9–34 (Sahidic text), 75–83 (Italian translation); reedited by T. ORLANDI, Testi copti. Vol. 1. Encomio di Atanasio, vol. 2. Vita di Atanasio (Studi copti 3). Milan 1968, 87–119 (Sahidic text and indices), 121–137 (Italian translation). 43 In BnF, Copte 129(14), f. 75r, which is a fragment from one of the White Monastery codices of this writing, the gnomes are attributed to Hippolytus of Rome. 44 Quotations from the Physiologus are attested in the Sahidic, Bohairic and Fayyumic dialects of Coptic. The most complete inventory of the Coptic texts which contain quotations from the Physiologus can be found in VAN LANTSCHOOT, A propos du Physiologus (see fn. 41). Cf. also A. ERMAN, Bruchstücke des koptischen Physiologus, in: ZÄS 33 (1985), 51–57; R. KÜHNER, Physiologos, in: ICCoptS 2 (1985), 135–147; L. MACCOULL, The Coptic Triadon and the Ethiopic Physiologus, in: OC 75 (1991), 141–146.