* One would naturally suppose that allusions to the well- known name of the Antiochene Daphne implied heathen worship: but the fasts and sabbaths are, of course, Jewish, and from Hom. adv. Iudeos i. (ed. Bened. i. 595 D) it appears that there was a Jewish synagogue at Daphne, besides that in Antioch : 20} sotiro ob wept r75 Evtatdx Aéyw covayayrs povev &AA& zai rns ev Aégyn, Tovnporepoy yep exes td Bapablpov 6 dh xoedovcs Morpavys .. . sol nol 7d Morpdvns xat rd Tod "ArdrArwvos lepdy Goiws bar) BEByAov.
PATRISTIC COMMENTARIES
translated if no Latin commentary of equal ‘lati- tude’ should come into the hands of the monks of Vivarium.
That the Homilies should have been early trans- lated into Syriac is only what we should expect; and the evidence of the catalogue of Syriac MSS in the British Museum fully confirms such expecta- tions. The material falls naturally into the three classes of (a) translations at full leneth ; (6) abridg- ments extending over several or all of the Epistles ; (c) fragmentary quotations.
(a) Translations. Romans: MS deexlv.* (Brit. Mus. Add. 17164) is for the most part a palim- psest of a 6th or 7th century MS of the homilies on Romans. 1 Corinthians: MS dixxxix. (Add. 14563), seee. vil.—viii., Hom. xx.-xxxiii.; MS dxe. (Add. 12160), A.D. 584, Hom. xxxiv.—xliv. 2 Corinthians: MS axci. (Add. 14564), see. vi.—vil., complete save for a few Jacune ; MS dxcii. (Add. 12180), seec. vi.—vil., complete. Ephesians: MS dxciii. (Add. 14565), sec. vi.—vii., complete. Philippians, Philemon: MS dxciv. (Add. 14566), seee. vi., fragments. Colossians, Titus: MS dxey. (Add. 14566, part 2), seec. vi.—vil., consider- able portions. 1 and 2 Thessalonians: MS dxevi. (Add. 17152), A.D. 594, complete.t—In this group of MSS all the Epistles are represented except Galatians and 1 and 2 Timothy.
(6) Whereas the MSS of translations in full of the Homilies range from 550 to 750 A.D., those of abridgments and extracts—in which all or most of the Epistles are treated in a single MS—belong to the later centuries; and this is probably not an accidental distinction, but is a parallel pheno- menon to the supersession of commentaries by Catenze in general.—MS deexiv. (Add. 14683), foll. 1-141, sec. x.: parts 3 and 4 (with two great lacune) of a commentary on the Pauline epistles abridged from Chrysostom, containing Galatians [Gal 6%-end, Eph., Ph 1?" lost], Philippians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians [1 and 2 Tim., Philem., He 1-107 lost], He 10%-end; on fol. 140d isa complete list of the number of Chrysostom’s homilies on each epistle.—MS decelii. (Add. 12168), foll. 166-233, seec. viii.-ix.: Pauline epistles, with extracts throughout from Chrysostom ; Colossians comes at the end between Titus and Hebrews.— MS deecliii. (Add. 12144), foll. 123-176, A.D. 1081: Catena on all the Epistles, principally, but in this case not exclusively, from Chrysostom.
(c) The fragmentary quotations are far too many to enumerate here, and must be sought for in the catalogue itself, and in Wright’s invaluable index to it. Often, of course, the motive for the choice of the passages is the dogmatic interest: thus MS decelvii. (Add. 12155), seee. viii., consists largely of testimonia collected from the Fathers with a view to the refutation of various heretics; and citations, or groups of citations, from Chrysostom on the Epistles occur on no fewer than twelve occasions, representing on one or other occasion each set of his Homilies. my
It remains to give an account of the principal editions of the Greek text, and of the manuscript authority on which they are based.
The editio princeps of the original Greek text of Chrysostom on St. Paul is the Veronensis, a superb piece of typography in four folio parts,t published at Verona ‘per Stephanum et fratres a Sabio’ in 1529; the patron, according to the preface addressed
* The roman numerals are those of Wright’s catalogue.
+ The homilies on 2 Thessalonians are reckoned not as five homilies, but as an introduction and four homilies ; compare the arrangement for Romans and Philippians in the earlier editions of the Greek (above, pp. 502, 503>).
t That is, it is paged with four separate paginations, but there is only one colophon, and no copy that the present writer has seen is bound in four volumes. Possibly it was issued in sheets only, and bound in volumes at each purchaser’s discretion.
PATRISTIC COMMENTARIES 505
to pope Clement vil. by Donatus of Verona, was Gibertus, bishop of the see.* Part i. contains the homilies on the Romans (foll. 1-132) and Ephesians (1383-204) ; part ii. the two Thessalonian epistles (foll. 1-88, 34-47), Colossians (48-86), 1 Corinthians (87-255); part iii. the Second Epistle to the Co- rinthians (1-93), Titus (93-108), Hebrews (109-205), Philippians (205-249); part iv. the two Epistles to Timothy (1-42, 42-70), Philemon (71-78), and Gala- tians (78-107). The Greek is given without any Latin translation. The homilies on all epistles except 1 and 2 Thess., Col., and 1 Cor. are divided each into two parts, the more strictly homiletic portion at the end being separated off with the title 7@:céy, The general title of the homily and its running headline is \éyos a’, Adyos B’, and so on. Even the commentary on Galatians has the running title \éyos a throughout; but, being a commentary and not homilies, it has of course no ‘ethical’ sec- tion. The text of the whole edition is taken appar- ently from a single manuscript, identified by Heyse (see below on the Oxford edition) with the Venice MS, Marcianus 103, seec. xi. The unusual order in which the Epistles occur in the edition is no doubt faithfully reproduced from the order of the MS: as each series of homilies circulated from the first independently, and were rarely brought together into a single MS, there was no fixed rule to follow, and the sequence in the Venice MS may be assumed to be accidental. The Verona edition is, apart from the matter of punctuation, warmly praised by Savile; its faults were due to the imperfect condition of the ‘half-eaten’? MS on which it was based. Indeed it is now clear that, as regards the type of text used, succeeding editors (until we come to Field) progressively deteriorated from the standard of the editio princeps rather than im- proved upon it.