Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 November 2011
One of the most important contributions to the textual criticism of Athanasius was published last year in the Revue d' histoire ecclésiastique, xxi, pp. 525 ff., by Professor J. Lebon. In it he announced the discovery in a late manuscript on Mt. Athos (Dochiariou 78) of a text of the De Incarnatione of Athanasius which differs so much from the ordinary text that it amounts to a separate recension. He pointed out that the antiquity of this recension is proved by conclusive evidence that it was known to Theodoret and to Leontius of Byzantium, and that it appears to have been akin to the Greek translated into Syriac in Cod. Vat. Syr. 104 in Rome, a manuscript of the sixth century. By the time that this number of the Review is published it is probable that Professor Lebon's edition of Dochiariou 78 will have appeared in the Spicilegium sacrum Lovaniense.
1 An extended treatment of the Syriac version found in Vat. Syr. 104, possibly the most important witness to this recension, is to be expected from Professor Lebon.
2 The unfamiliar symbols JMN stand respectively for Sorbonne Gr. 190, Bibliotheca Laurentiana Plut iv. Cod. XX, and Patmos 4. The Athens MS. often omits accents and even breathings. We have not recorded this in this collation.
3 This passage, as is pointed out by Lebon, is quoted as an extract from the De Incarnatione by Theodoret and by Leontius of Byzantium. The text of Theodoret is as follows:—Τοῦ αὐτοῦ, ἐκ τοῦ αὐτοῦ λόγου. Πάσχον μὲν γὰρ τὸ σῶμα κατὰ τὴν τῶν σωμάτων ϕύσιν ἀπέθνησκεν εῖχε δὲ τῆς ἀϕθαρσίας τὴν πίστιν ἐκ τοῦ ἐνοικήσαντος αὐτῷ Δόγου. Οὐ γὰρ ἀποθνήσκοντος τοῦ σωματος ἐνεκροῦτο καὶ Λόγος ἀλλ᾽ ἦν μὲν αὐτὸς ἀπαθὴς καὶ ἄϕθαρτος καὶ ἀθάνατος, οἶα δὴ θεοῦ Λόγος ὑπάρχων, συνὼν δὲ μᾶλλον τῷ σώματι, διεκώλυεν ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ τὴν κατὰ ϕύσιν τῶν σωμάτων ϕθοράν, ᾗ ϕησι καὶ τὸ Πνεῦμα πρὸς αύτόν “Ού δώσεις τὸν ὄσιόν σου ἰδεῖν διαϕθοράν.” (Migne, P. G., lxxxiii, col. 296.)
The text of Leontius is apparently not extant in Greek, but the Latin leaves no room for doubt as to the identity of the passage. It runs as follows:— Patiens quidem corpus propter naturam corporum mortuum est; habebat autem fidem incorruptibilitatis ex Verbo habitants in eo: non enim mortuo corpore immoriebatur Verbum, sed erat ipsum incorruptibile et impassible et immortale, utpote Dei Verbum. Immo vero quia erat in corpore, prohibebat eum a corruptione secundum naturam corporum, sicut ait illi Spiritus: “Non dabis sanctum tuum videre corruptionem” (Gallandius, Bibl. Vet. Patr. Graec. Lat., xii, p. 683).
It is also found in Fr. 86 of the Sermo maior de fide. Cf. E. Schwartz, “Der sogenannte Sermo maior de fide des Athanasius,” Sitzungsberichte der bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, philosophisch-philologische und historische Klasse, 1924. 6. Abhandlung. Munich 1925, pp. 34, 39; and J. Lebon, “Le sermo maior de fide pseudo-athanasien,” Le Muséon, xxxviii, p. 260.
It is obvious that if the Athens manuscript represented a doctrinal revision it is very unlikely to have been used both by Theodoret and by Leontius.
4 Cf. for example § 16.1 (Robertson, p. 24, 3–10): ἄπαξ γὰρ εἰς αἰσθητὰ πεσούσης τῆς διανοίας τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ὑπέβαλεν ἑαυτὸν διὰ σώματος ϕανῆναι ὁ λόγος ἴνα μετενέγκῃ εἰς ἑαυτὸν ὡς ἄνθρωπον τοὺς ἀνθρώπους, καὶ τὰς αἰσθήσεις αὐτῶν εἰς ἑαντὸν ἀποκλίνῃ, καὶ λοιπὸν ἐκείνους ὡς ἅνθρωπον αὐτὸν ὁρῶντας, δι᾽ ὦν ἐργάζεται ἔργων, πείσῃ μὴ εῖναι ἑαυτὸν ἄνθρωπον μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ θεὸν καὶ θεοῦ ἀληθινοῦ λόγον καὶ σοϕίαν, where Ath reads … πείσῃ μὴ εἶναι αὐτὸν ἄνθρωπον, ἀλλὰ θεὸν καὶ θεοῦ ἀληθινοῦ λόγον καὶ σοϕίαν.
