TheReceptionofJohnChrysostominEarlyModern Europe:TranslatingandReadingaGreekChurch Fatherfrom1417to1624Kennerley
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-reception-of-johnchrysostom-in-early-modern-europe-translating-and-reading-agreek-church-father-from-1417-to-1624-kennerley/
Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) ready for you
Download now and discover formats that fit your needs...
Architecture and the Politics of Gender in Early Modern Europe 1st Edition Helen Hills (Editor)
https://ebookmass.com/product/architecture-and-the-politics-of-genderin-early-modern-europe-1st-edition-helen-hills-editor/
ebookmass.com
Lives Uncovered: A Sourcebook of Early Modern Europe Nicholas Terpstra
https://ebookmass.com/product/lives-uncovered-a-sourcebook-of-earlymodern-europe-nicholas-terpstra/
ebookmass.com
The Dialectics of Orientalism in Early Modern Europe 1st Edition Marcus Keller
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-dialectics-of-orientalism-in-earlymodern-europe-1st-edition-marcus-keller/
ebookmass.com
Thomas Aquinas’ Mathematical Realism Jean W. Rioux
https://ebookmass.com/product/thomas-aquinas-mathematical-realismjean-w-rioux/
ebookmass.com
How To Create Wealth Investing In Real Estate: How to Build Wealth with Multi-Family Real Estate
https://ebookmass.com/product/how-to-create-wealth-investing-in-realestate-how-to-build-wealth-with-multi-family-real-estate/
ebookmass.com
Spectroscopy and Dynamics of Single Molecules: Methods and Applications Carey Johnson (Editor)
https://ebookmass.com/product/spectroscopy-and-dynamics-of-singlemolecules-methods-and-applications-carey-johnson-editor/
ebookmass.com
Breast 2nd Edition Susan C. Lester
https://ebookmass.com/product/breast-2nd-edition-susan-c-lester/
ebookmass.com
The Bible and Feminism: Remapping the Field Yvonne Sherwood
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-bible-and-feminism-remapping-thefield-yvonne-sherwood/
ebookmass.com
Orc's Pride (Orc Warriors of Protheka Book 12) Celeste King
https://ebookmass.com/product/orcs-pride-orc-warriors-of-prothekabook-12-celeste-king/
ebookmass.com
Essentials of Software Engineering 4th Edition, (Ebook PDF)
https://ebookmass.com/product/essentials-of-software-engineering-4thedition-ebook-pdf/
ebookmass.com
SamKennerley
TheReceptionofJohnChrysostominEarlyModernEurope
Arbeitenzur Kirchengeschichte
Foundedby KarlHoll † andHansLietzmann †
Editedby
ChristianAlbrecht,ChristophMarkschies andChristopherOcker
Volume157
SamKennerley TheReceptionofJohn ChrysostominEarly ModernEurope
TranslatingandReadingaGreekChurchFather from1417to1624
ISBN978-3-11-070884-4
e-ISBN(PDF)978-3-11-070890-5
e-ISBN(EPUB)978-3-11-070896-7
ISSN1861-5996
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2022946561
BibliographicinformationpublishedbytheDeutscheNationalbibliothek
TheDeutscheNationalbibliothekliststhispublicationintheDeutscheNationalbibliografie; detailedbibliographicdataareavailableontheinternetathttp://dnb.dnb.de.
©2023WalterdeGruyterGmbH,Berlin/Boston
Typesetting:IntegraSoftwareServicesPvt.Ltd.
Printingandbinding:CPIbooksGmbH,Leck
www.degruyter.com
Tomyteachers
TimGreenwood
EmilyMichelson
VickyJanssens
ScottMandelbrote
RobertoCarfagni
PedroEmilioRiveraDíaz
MagistrisAcademiaeVivariiNovi
Contents
AbbreviationsXI
Part1: Introduction
1Introduction3
Part2: FromlateantiquitytotheItalianRenaissance
1ThetransmissionandtranslationofChrysostomduringlate antiquitytheMiddleAges11
1.1ApottedbiographyofJohnChrysostom 11
1.2Fromthefourthtothesixthcentury:Theearliestperiod ofreception 12
1.3Fromthesixthtotheninthcentury:Theoldestmanuscripts ofChrysostom 21
1.4Fromtheninthtotheeleventhcentury:Thereception ofChrysostominByzantiumduringthe ‘Macedonian Renaissance’ 26
1.5Fromthetwelfthtothefifteenthcentury:The ‘twelfth-century Renaissance’ andafter 29
1.6Conclusion:Thestateofaffairsupto1417 34
2AmbrogioTraversari:TranslatingChrysostominearlyRenaissance Florence36
2.1AmbrogioTraversari’stranslationsofChrysostom 36
2.2TraversariandcontemporaryByzantinescholarship 44
3JohnChrysostominlateByzantineandpost-Byzantinepatristic scholarship47
3.1ChrysostominByzantinepatristicscholarshipatCouncil ofFerrara-Florence 47
3.2ChrysostomandtheconsensusoftheFathersintheGreek worldaftertheCouncilofFerrara-Florence 54
4TranslationsofJohnChrysostominRenaissanceRomefromNicholasV (1447–1455)toSixtusIV(1471–1484)62
4.1ThefoundationoftheVaticanLibrary,anditscollection ofGreekmanuscriptsofChrysostom 62
4.2TwoGreektranslatorsofJohnChrysostom:George ofTrebizondandTheodoreGaza 65
4.3TranslationsofChrysostombyLatinscholars,1450–1484. 1:PietroBalbi 76
4.4TranslationsofChrysostombyLatinscholars,1450–1484. 2:FrancescoGriffolini 82
4.5TranslationsofChrysostombyLatinscholars,1450–1484. 3:Tortelli,Lippi,Brenta,Persona,Valentini,Lando,and Selling 93
4.6ReadingChrysostomintheItalianRenaissance:Theexample ofJeanJouffroy 96
5ThefirstprintededitionsofJohnChrysostom,c.1466–1504105
5.1IncunabulaeditionsofChrysostom 105
5.2Thefirst Operaomnia:1503(Venice)and1504(Basel) 111
Part3: ThepoliticsofpatristicscholarshipinReformation Basel:Erasmus,hisfriends,andtheirenemies
1Newtexts,newquestions,andanewinterpretationofPaul121
2ThepoliticsofpatristicscholarshipinReformationBasel131
3Erasmusinexile:The1530and1536 Operaomnia 151
4Erasmus’s LifeofJohnChrysostom 163
4.1 ChrysostomusalterPaulus 163
4.2Thestudyofspuria 175
Part4: Patristicscholarshipinanage ofconfessionalisation
1Confessionalisationandscholarship:Settingthescene185
2TestingandignoringconfessionalisationinBrescia,Basel, andParis:1536–1547188
2.1Experimentsinconfessionalisationineditionsprinted between1536and1539 188
2.2Aconfessionalorcommercialrivalry?The Operaomnia of Paris(1543)andBasel(1547) 193
3AnItalianinterlude:1548–1554202
4Arivalryrenewed:The Operaomnia of1556(Paris),1558(Basel), and1570(Paris)214
5CensoringandtranslatingChrysostominItaly,theLowCountries, andFrance,1571–1585228
5.1TheplaceoftheChurchFathersintheRomanindexbetween thedeathofMarcelloCervini(1555)andtheestablishmentof theCongregationoftheIndex(1571) 228
5.2SuppressingandsupportingscholarshipinBolognaand Antwerp 235
5.3PlansforaRoman Operaomnia ofChrysostom 240
5.4JacquesdeBillyandthe1581Paris Operaomnia 245
5.5Assessingtheimpactofconfessionalisationandcensorship onpatristicsbetween1571and1585 249
6Education,collaboration,andconfession:1585–1624252
6.1Educationandconfession:PrintingChrysostomforthe classroom 252
6.2Collaborationandconfession.1:JérômeCommelinandhis successors 259
6.3Collaborationandconfession.2:HenrySavile’searlyplans foraGreekeditionofChrysostom,andtheresponseof FrontonduDuc 266
6.4Collaborationandconfession.3:HenrySavilecompleteshis edition,withhelpfromFrontonduDuc 272
6.5Conclusion 278
Part5: Generalconclusion
Generalconclusion283
1Expansion,change,ordevelopment? 283
2WhytheearlymodernreceptionofChrysostomstillmatters.
1:Theongoingsignificanceofearlymoderneditionstothe GreektextofChrysostom 285
3WhytheearlymodernreceptionofChrysostomstillmatters.
2:LatinisChrysostom’ssecondlanguage 286
4WhytheearlymodernreceptionofChrysostomstillmatters.
3:Lossessincetheearlymodernperiod 288
5WhytheearlymodernreceptionofChrysostomstillmatters.
4:Nooneeditioncananswereveryquestion 289
Bibliography291
Images317
Indices319
Abbreviations
Allen, Opusepistolarum
Barb.lat.
BnF
Erasmus,Desiderius. Opusepistolarum,editedbyPercyS.Allen, HelenM.Allen,andHeathcoteW.Garrod.Oxford:Clarendon Press,1906–1958.Citationbythenumberoftheletterinthis edition.
BibliotecaApostolicaVaticana,Barb.lat.
Paris:BibliothèquenationaledeFrance BuA Staehelin,Ernst,ed. BriefeundAktenzumLebenOekolampads. Leipzig:M.HeinsiusNachfolger,1927–1934.
CC Florence:ArchiviodiStato,CarteCerviniane
CCG CodicesChrysostomicigraeci (Paris:LesÉditionsduCERF,1968-) Contemporaries Bietenholz,PeterG.andThomasD.Deutscher,eds. ContemporariesofErasmus.Toronto:UniversityofTorontoPress, 1985–1987.
CT ConciliumTridentium.Diariorum,Actorum,Epistularum, Tractatuumnouacollectio.Freiburg-im-Breisgau:Herder, 1901–2001.
CWE CollectedWorksofErasmus (Toronto:UniversityofTorontoPress, 1974-)
D&S
ConciliumFlorentinum,documentaetscriptores.Rome: PontificiumInstitutumOrientaliumStudiorum,1940–1977.
ILI Bujanda,JoséM.etal. Indexdeslivresinterdits.Sherbrooke: Centred’étudesdelaRenaissance,1984–2002.
Monac.gr. Munich:BayerischeStaatsbibliothek,Cod.graec.
PG Patrologiagraeca (Paris:Migne,1857–1866)
PL Patrologialatina (Paris:Migne,1841–1865)
Pal.gr.
Reg.lat.
BibliotecaApostolicaVaticana,Pal.gr.
BibliotecaApostolicaVaticana,Reg.lat.
SC Sourceschrétiennes
Urb.gr.
Urb.lat.
BibliotecaApostolicaVaticana,Urb.gr.
BibliotecaApostolicaVaticana,Urb.lat.
USTC UniversalShortTitleCatalogue,accessibleonlineat https://www.ustc.ac.uk/
Vat.gr.
Vat.lat.
BibliotecaApostolicaVaticana,Vat.gr.
BibliotecaApostolicaVaticana,Vat.lat.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110708905-203
Part1: Introduction
1Introduction
Thefollowingbookexploreswhen,how,why,andbywhomoneofthemost influentialFathersoftheGreekChurchwastranslatedandreadataparticularlysignificantmomentinthereceptionofhisworks.Ithasbeenwrittenwith twoaudiencesinmind.Ononehand,thisbookisaddressedtoresearchersof thehistoryandliteratureoflateantiquity,suchaseditorsofpatristictextsand theirreaders.Ontheother,itisdirectedathistoriansoftheearlymodernperiod,inparticularhistoriansoftranslation,ideas,andscholarship.Theinterestsoftheseaudiencesoftenoverlap,buttheirhistoriographyandresearch questionsaredifferentenoughtowar ranttreatingthemseparatelyinthis Introduction.
Tothefirst,thisbookaimstoprovi deanoverallaccountofthetextual transmissionofworksbyorattributedtoChrysostomduringtheearlymodern period.Iamnotthefirstpersontoattemptthismammothtask.Thisbook wouldhavebeeninfinitelypoorerwithouttheworkofscholarsfromDom MorintoWendyMayer,whohaveexaminedspecificaspectsofthereceptionof Chrysostomusingearlymodernsources.However,thego-tostudyforageneral accountofthetransmissionofChrysostom’sworksisstillBaur’s S.JeanChrysostomeetsesoeuvresdanslahistoirelittéraire ,whichwasfirstpublishedin 1907.1 Thataworkprintedoveronehundredyearsagoisstillinregularuseis testamenttoitsquality.Inparticular,Baur’ssurveyofvernaculartranslations willremainuseful,asitcoversathemethatwillnotbetreatedhere.ThefollowingbookwillfocusonGreekandLatin,asthatisoneareainwhichBaur’sresearchcanbegreatlyexpandedandupdated.HishistoryofeditionsinGreek andLatinprintedduringtheentireperiodcoveredbythisbookamountstojust sixpages,forexample.2 Referenceworksthatarenowfundamentaltopatristic studies,suchasthe ClavisPatrumGraecorum,alsoappearedlongafterBaur’s book,asdidthestudiesofspecificaspectsofthereceptionofChrysostomthat werenotedabove.
Asaresult,itishopedthatscholarsoflateantiquitywillparticularlybenefitfromthebibliographicalinformationcontainedinthisbook.Suchreaders mayfindheremanuscriptsandeditionsofChrysostomthattheywerepreviouslyunawareof,orwhosehistoryrequiredelucidation.Thismaybeespecially trueforLatintranslationsofChrysostomthatcanonlybefoundinmanuscript,
ChrysostomusBaur, S.JeanChrysostomeetsesoeuvresdansl’histoirelittéraire (Louvain:BureauxduRecueil,1907).
Baur, JeanChrysostomeetsesoeuvres,82–8.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110708905-001
someofwhich,suchasthoseofAmbrogioTraversari,mightbeofinterestto moderncriticsduetotheiruseofnow-lostGreekmanuscripts.ThesameaudiencemayalsowishtopayspecialattentiontoPart3andtheConclusionofthis book,astheytracethedevelopmentoftheearlymoderneditionsthatprovide muchoftheLatinandGreektextofChrysostomthatwereadtoday.
Tofacilitatetheuseofthisbookasareferencevolume,Ihavekeyedinthe worksofChrysostomtothe ClavisPatrumGraecorum (CPG),andeditionstothe onlinedatabasethe UniversalShortTitleCatalogue (USTC).PaoloSachetiscreating aonlinedatabasededicatedtothereceptionoftheChurchFathers(“AGAPE”) whichwillcollectanddescribepatristiceditionsprintedbetween1450and1600, butIhavenototherwisereferredtothisresourceasithadyettobelaunched whenIcompletedworkonthisbook.NoequivalentdatabaseexistsformanuscriptsoftheChurchFathers,whoseshelfmarksIhavehowevercitedinfull,or shortenedinthemannerdescribedinthe ‘Abbreviations’ pageabove.Byreferring totheindicesofthisbook,areaderinterestedinaparticulartextshouldtherefore beabletogainasenseofitstransmissionbetweenthefifteenthandtheseventeenthcentury,orattheveryleasttofindtheearlymodernmanuscriptsandeditionsthatwouldallowthemtoacquirethatsensethemselves.
Thebibliographicalsideofthisbookanswersthequestions ‘when’ and ‘by whom’.Butresearchersofthehistoryandliteratureoflateantiquitymayalso beinterestedin ‘how ’ and ‘why’ certaintextsofChrysostomweretranslated andreadbetween1417and1624,topicsthatIexpecttobeofmostsignificance tohistoriansoftheearlymodernperiodaswell.ExplaininghowIhaveaddressedthesequestionsrequiresacloserstudyofthecontentsofthisbook.
ThefirstChapterofPart2ofthisbookoffersarapidoverviewofthetransmissionofChrysostom’sworksinLatinandGreekduringlateantiquityandtheMiddleAges,beforeouranalysismovesontothetranslationandreadingofthis ChurchFatherfromthefifteenthtotheearlysixteenthcentury.Chapter2studies thefirsttranslatorofChrysostomintoLatinduringthefifteenth-century,Ambrogio Traversari,tracinghistranslationsofChrysostombacktohismonasticvocation andpapallegislationabouttheJews.AnattempttoidentifyTraversari’sGreekexemplarforhisversionofmanyofChrysostom’shomiliesofPaulisfollowedbya studyofhisknowledgeofpatristicscholarshipintheByzantineEmpire,notleast duringhisattendanceattheCouncilofFerrara-Florence,whereGreekandLatin prelatesmettodiscussaunionoftheChurchesbetweenJune1438andJuly1439. ThedebatesatthiscounciltakecentrestageforthethirdchapterofPart2,which findsthattheyshowameaningfulexchangeofpatristicscholarshipbetween GreeksandLatins,inparticularoverpatristicconsensus,andChrysostom’sstatus astheauthoritativeinterpreterofPaul.Thisthirdchapterconcludesbyexploring howpro-unionistwriterssuchasMammas,Plousiadenos,andBessarionsoughtto
convincetheirByzantinereadersthatRome,notConstantinople,wasthetrueheir totheChurchofGreekFatherslikeChrysostom.
GreekinterpretersretaintheirprominenceinthefourthchapterofPart2, whichfollowsthecollectionandtranslationofGreekmanuscriptsofChrysostominRomefromthereignofPopeNicholasV(1447–1455)tothatofPopeSixtusIV(1471–1484).KeyherearetwoByzantinescholars,GeorgeofTrebizond andTheodoreGaza,whoarenowbestk nownfortheiracrimoniousdispute aboutthecorrectmannertotranslateAristotleintoLatin.Bycontrast,this chaptershowsthattheylargelyagreedonthetranslationofChrysostom,anapparentcontradictionthathighlightst heimportanceoftheoriesofrhetoricto thepracticeofLatintranslationduringtheearlymodernperiod.Thisstudyof Renaissancepracticesoftranslationcontinuesintoananalysisoftheworkof LatinscholarslikePietroBalbiandFrancescoGriffolini.Followingtheirtranslationsthroughdifferentstagesofdevelopment,itarguesthatthesetranslators progressively ‘ polished ’ awayanytraceoftheirGreekexemplarstoproduce evermoreLatinatepiecesoforatory.TherhetoricalandmoralinterestinChrysostomimpliedbythesetranslationsisthenshowntobeconsistentwithhowhe wasreadbytheBurgundiancardinalandbibliophileJeanJouffroy.
Mostoftheresearchforthesechapterswasconductedonmanuscripts, someofwhichhaveyettofeatureinanyaccountofthereceptionofChrysostom.However,thefifthchapterofPart2addsprintedbookstothemix.ItfollowshownewtranslationsofChrysostomtravelledfromthescriptoriaofRome tothepressesoftheRhineland,butobservesthatearlybuyersofprintedbooks apparentlypreferredtoreadthepenitentialandexegeticalworksthathadbeen popularduringlateantiquityandMiddleAges.Next,thischaptershowsthat theprintingoftranslationsofChrysostomwasanythingbutastraightforward reproductionofmanuscriptexemplars.Ithighlightsexamplesofdeliberateeditorialinterventioninearlyeditionsof Chrysostom,especiallyinthefirstcollectedworksofthisChurchFatherprintedin1503and1504.
Part2ofthisbookstudieseditorsandtranslatorswhoarenolongerhouseholdnames.Bycontrast,Part3concentratesonamuchbetter-knownfigure, DesideriusErasmus,aswellasonhisfriendsandenemies.Chapter1outlines thehistoryandmotivationsofErasmus’searlyworkonChrysostom.Itargues thatErasmus ’scollectionofGreekmanuscriptsofChrysostomledhimtoengagewiththisChurchFather’sanalysisofPaul,andultimatelytoelevateChrysostomaboveAugustineasaninterpreteroftheApostleonkeytheological issuesoftheReformation.TheimpactoftheReformationonearlymodernpatristicsisfurtherpursuedinChapter2,whichexploreshowErasmuscollaboratedwithotherCatholiceditorsofChrysostominordertounderminetheleaderof theProtestantReformationinBasel,JohannesOecolampadius.Erasmusemerges
fromthischapteraslessirenicthanhehas oftenbeenportrayed,arevisionofhis legacythatisachievedbyanalysisofthedeliberaterevisionsthathemadetohis correspondence.
Furtherre-readingofErasmus’scorrespondenceisproposedinChapter3, whichstudiesthe Operaomnia ofChrysostomprintedatBaselin1530.Erasmus’s letterssuggestthathewasinoverallcommandofthisedition,andthathepermittedOecolampadiustoparticipateinitoutofalackofotheroptions.Butan alternativeapproachtothismaterialsuggeststhatOecolampadiuswastheleadingfigureinthecreationofthe1530 Operaomnia,andthatheproducedan overtlyProtestanteditionofChrysostomthatErasmusandhisfriendsattempted tosupplantwithaCatholicalternativesixyearslater.Chapter4evaluatesErasmus’smaincontributiontothis1536edition,his LifeofJohnChrysostom.ItconcludesthatwhilerecenthistoriographyiscorrecttochallengewhetherErasmus’s biographiesoftheLatinFatherswereasrevolutionaryashasoftenbeenclaimed, thesourcesandcontentofhis LifeofChrysostom markagenuinedeparturefrom lateantiqueandmedievalaccountsofthisChurchFather.
AreaderofthesechapterswillcomeawaywithanErasmuswhowasmore closelyinvolvedinconfessionalpolemicagainstProtestantismthanhassofar beenbelieved.TheinteractionbetweenreligiousconfessionandpatristicscholarshipraisedbythesechaptersisfurtherexploredinPart4ofthisbook.Aftera shortfirstchapterreviewingrecenthistoriographyonthistopic,Chapter2arguesthateditionsofChrysostomprintedbetween1536and1547invertorchallengeconfessionalexplanationsofearlymodernpatristicscholarship.Wefind BenedictinemonksusingChrysostomtoquestionscholastictheology,andProtestanttheologiansfaithfullytranslatingpatristichomiliesinfavouroftheintercessionofthesaints.Indeed,whilethischaptershowsthateditorsinCatholic ParisandProtestantBaselconstantlysoughttooutdooneanother,itfindsthat thiscompetition,andthealterationstothetextofChrysostomthatitencouraged,canbebestexplainedbyacommercialratherthanreligiousrivalrybetweenthesecities.Aratherdifferentimpressionisgainedfromtranslationsof ChrysostomplannedorprintedinItalybetween1548and1554,whicharestudiedinChapter3.Thischaptershowsthattheseandothertranslationsofthe ChurchFathersweresupportedbyCardinalMarcelloCervini,andthatCervini bankrolledsuchworksinordertousetheminrefutationsofProtestantdoctrine attheCouncilofTrent.Thehistoryofthesetranslationsthereforesuggeststhat confessionalisationcouldbeaproductiveaswellasarepressiveforceinearly modernscholarship.
CrossingbackovertheAlps,Chapter4returnstotherivalrybetweenthe pressesofParisandBasel,studying Operaomnia ofChrysostomprintedtherebetween1554and1570.ThischaptershowsthattheroyallibraryatFontainebleau
begantobeexploitedbyFrencheditorsofChrysostominthe1550s,resultingin significantalterationstothereceivedtextofChrysostominthe1554 Operaomnia printedinParis.Thethorougheditingevidentinthe1554 Operaomnia isthen contrastedwithothersprintedinBaselandinParisin1558and1570,whose modestrevisionofthetextofChrysostomistracedinthefirstinstancetoadeclineineditorialstandardsattheFrobenpress,andinthesecondtotheoutbreak ofreligiouswarfareinFrance.Chapter5refinestheconclusionsofChapter3, highlightingawealthoftranslationsandeditionsofChrysostomthatwere plannedunderthesupervisionoftheCongregationoftheIndexbetween1571 and1585,andarguingthattheirdifficulttransmissionhistoryindicatesthat confessionalisationcouldsuppressa swellasstimulatescholarshiponthe ChurchFathers.
Thefinalmainchapterofthisbookextendsthestudyofconfessionandpatristicscholarshipdownto1624.Itarguesthatreligiousconfessioninformed editionsofChrysostomprintedforuse inschools,butproposesatthesame timethatthisfactshouldnotobscureotherinterpretationsofferedbythese sources.ItthenexploresthelandmarkeditionsofChrysostomeditedbyJérôme CommelininHeidelberg,HenrySavileinEton,andFrontonduDucinParis, contrastingtheevidenceofreligiousconfessionintheseeditionswiththeinterconfessionalcollaborationonwhichtheydependedfortheirexistence.Ashort ConclusionconnectsearlymodernandmoderneditionsofChrysostom,demonstratingthelastingimpactofRenais sanceandReformationscholarshipon studiesofthisChurchFathertoday.
Completingthisaccountofatwo-hundredyearlongperiodinthereception ofoneofthemostwidely-readandcommonly-translatedauthorsintheGreek languagehastakenenoughtimeformetoacquirenumerousdebts.Thisbook beganlifeasanAHRC-fundedPhDthesiswrittenattheUniversityofCambridge underthesupervisionofScottMandelbrote,towhomIowemorethanheprobablyknows.Verylittleofthatthesisremainsinthefollowingbook,exceptforin thechaptersaboutErasmus.IreviewedthosechaptersandwrotemostofPart2 asaResearchFellowatPeterhouse,Cambridge(2017–2020),andwrotePart4, thefirstchapterofPart2,andtheConclusionasHannahSeegerDavisResearch FellowattheSeegerCenterforHellenicStudiesatPrinceton(2020–2022).I addedthefinishingtoucheswhileinreceiptofaCarlFriedrichvonSiemensResearchFellowshipoftheAlexandervonHumboldtFoundationattheLudwigMaximilians-UniversitätinMunich.Igladlyexpressmythankstothesebodies andinstitutionsformakingmyresearchpossible.
Ofcourse,Ihavealsoacquiredmanydebtstofriendsandcolleaguesinthe meantime.AspecialthanksgotoAnd reasAmmann,PierreAugustin,GuillaumeBady,ScottMandelbrote,andJean-LouisQuantin,whoallkindlyread
draftchaptersofthisbook.Indedicatingthisstudytomyteachers,Ihopethat itwillgosomewaytojustifyingthetimethattheyspentonme,eventhoughI amsurethatitwillcontainmanymistakesforwhichIaloneamtoblame.Ican onlybegthereader’sindulgenceforsucherrors,quotingwithFrontonduDuc:
Part2: FromlateantiquitytotheItalian Renaissance
1Thetransmissionandtranslation ofChrysostomduringlateantiquity theMiddleAges
1.1ApottedbiographyofJohnChrysostom
JohnChrysostomwasbornaround350ADinAntioch,acityintheGreekspeakingeastoftheRomanEmpire.Verylittleremainsofthissite,whichislocatedclosetothemoderntownofAn takyainsouth-eastTurkey.Butwhen Johnwasborn,Antiochwasanold,largeandprosperoussettlementwithconsiderablereligiousdiversity,whereJewsandpagansrubbedshoulderswith Christiansloyaltooneofthecity’scompetingbishops.John’smother,Anthusa, wasaChristian,whilehisfatherSecundusservedonthestaffoftheRomanmilitarycommanderfortheeast,the magistermilitumperOrientem.Aswascommonforsomeoneofhissocialstanding,Johnreceivedaneducationdesigned toequiphimforafutureinthecivilserviceorthelawcourts.However,shortly aftercompletinghiseducation,JohnwasbaptisedbyMeletius,thepro-Nicene bishopofAntioch,throughthisritemarkinghisintentiontopursueacareerin theChurch.JohnservedonMeletius’sstaffandwasappointedlectoramonghis clergy,atthesametimeattendingaschoolofasceticismrunbyDiodoreofTarsus.JohnthenleftAntiochtopursuefurtherasceticstudiesunderthetutelage ofanagedSyrianhermit,intheprocesslearningtheOldandNewTestament byheart.HavingreturnedtoAntioch,Johnprogressedthroughtheclericalorders.Hewasappointeddeacon,andwasthenordainedapriestin386byMeletius ’ssuccessor,Flavian.Hespentthenext11yearspreachingandwritingin Antioch.TheeloquenceofhishomiliesandtractswouldearnJohnthenicknameof ‘Chrysostom’,or ‘thegoldenmouth’,atitleattestedinGreekasearly asthefifthcentury,andinLatininthemid-sixthcentury.1
John’slifechangedinthewinterof397.On26Septemberofthatyear,PatriarchNectariusofConstantinopledied,andJohnwasappointedashissuccessor insomewhatmysteriouscircumstances.Johnwasthereafterembroiledinthe arduousdemandsfacedbythebishopofacitythatwasnotonlythecapitalof theEasternRomanEmpire,butthathadbecomethesecondseeafterRomein
WendyMayer, “JohnChrysostom, ” TheWileyBlackwellCompaniontoPatristics ,ed.Ken Parry(Oxford:Wiley,2015),141;GuillaumeBady, “Enquêtedespremièresattestationsdusurnom ‘Chrysostome’ , ” in StudiaPatristica,vol.114,ed.MarkusVinzent,GuillaumeBady,and CatherineBroc-Schmezer(Leuven:Peeters,2021),143–59.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110708905-002
381.HespenthisearlyyearsinConstantinoplepreaching,combattingheresies suchasArianism,quellingcivildisturbances,andnegotiatingthereleaseof high-rankingofficialswhohadbeentakenprisonerbytheGoths.However, mattersturnedfortheworsein402.Inthatyear,whileJohnwasawaytoadministerecclesiasticaldisciplineinAsiaMinor,hisreplacementSeverianofGabalaseizedtheopportunitytowinoversectionsofthemetropolitannobility andclergywhowereunhappywithhisrule.ThisinternalcrisiswascompoundedbyJohn ’ sindecisivenessoveragroupofEgyptianmonkswhohad fledtoConstantinopleafterthepatriarchofAlexandria,Theophilus,hadaccusedthemoffollowingtheheresieso fOrigen.In403,Johnwastherefore calledbeforeasynodpackedwithhos tilebishops,accusedofamedleyof chargeslikeviolence,financialirregularity,andmoralcorruption.Herefused toattendandwasdeposed,butriotinginConstantinoplepersuadedtheimperialauthoritiestoorderhisrecall.Hisreturnwashowevershort-lived.Anoutbreakofviolencebetweenhissupport ersandimperialtroopspromptedthe authoritiestosendJohnintoexileforasecondtimeon20June404.Placed undermilitaryescort,Johnwasdispatchedtothefurthestreachesoftheempire,dyingin407whileonajourneytothesmalltownofPityusontheeastern shoreoftheBlackSea.2
1.2Fromthefourthtothesixthcentury:Theearliestperiod ofreception
Over800sermons,200letters,andahandfuloftractssurvivethatarecurrently attributedtoChrysostom.Thismountainofliteratureisjustafractionofwhat helikelypreachedorwrote,butthegapleftbytheselosseshasbeenfilledbya vastnumberofworksthatforcenturie sfalselycirculatedunderhisname. 3 JohnChrysostomisindeedthebest-attestedofanyGreekauthor.Hisauthentic worksalonecanbefoundinaboutoneineveryeightGreekmanuscriptsthat areextanttoday.4
PaulineAllenandWendyMayer, JohnChrysostom (London:Routledge,2000),3–11;summarisingandcorrectingJohnN.D.Kelly, GoldenMouth:ThestoryofJohnChrysostom – ascetic, preacher,bishop (London:Duckworth,1995).
Mayer, “JohnChrysostom,” 141–4.
GuillaumeBady, “Lesmanuscritsgrecsdes œuvresdeJeanChrysostomed’aprèslabasede données Pinakes etles CodiceschrysostomicigraeciVII:CodicumParisinorumparsprior, ” EruditioAntiqua 4(2012):67.
1.2Fromthefourthtothesixthcentury:Theearliestperiodofreception
Aswewillseelater,suchprominenceisoftenachievedbyauthorswho controlledthecontentanddistributionoftheirworks. 5 Apredictablelackof manuscriptssurvivingfromChrysostom’spenmakesitmoredifficulttobecertainabouttheshapeofhisworksduringhislifetime,orabouthiscontrolover thedisseminationofthem.However,Chrysostommayhavehadtheopportunitytomanagethetransmissionofatleastsomeofhiswritings.Forexample,it ispossiblethathislettershavecomedowntousfromaprivatearchiveofcorrespondence,suchasscholarsandpublicfiguresofhistimetypicallykept.6 We mightalsoimaginethatJohnensuredthatthelongertractsthatheprobably wroteforprivatereadingwerecopieddown,andmadeavailableforothersto transcribe.TheearliestevidenceforthereceptionofChrysostomindeedcomes fromareaderofjustsuchatract.In392,Jeromenotedinhis Devirisillustribus thathehadreadChrysostom ’ s Desacerodotio .Since Desacerdotio hadbeen writtenaround388–390,itappearsthatJeromehadaccesstoamanuscriptof thisworkinBethlehemjustafewyearsafteritscompositioninAntioch.7
IfChrysostom’slettersandtractsmayhavebeencuratedbytheirauthor, theoppositeconclusioncanbereachedabouthishomiliesonScripture.For longitwasassumedthatChrysostomdeliveredthesehomiliesinthepolished formandorderinwhichtheyarefoundinmostmanuscriptsandprintededitions.However,sincethemiddleofthelastcenturyithasbecomeclearthat thesehomiliesareknowntousthroughnotesjotteddownbytachygraphers whileChrysostomwaspreaching.Forexample,GreekcopiesofChrysostom ’s CommentaryonIsaiah stopabruptlyatIsaiah8:10.Justtwomanuscriptsexplainthereasonforthissuddenstop.Inthem,anotestatesthat “untilnowthis introductionbythemostholyarchbishopofConstantinople,JohnChrysostom, isfoundinGreekletters;afterthispoint,itisinsigns.” AsJeanDumortierhas argued,thatthetextofChrysostom ’s CommentaryonIsaiah isincompletein Greekisthereforeduetoanearlyscribewhowasunabletodecipherthetachygraphicsignsthatpreservedtherestofthecommentaryintheirexemplar.All laterGreekmanuscriptsderivefromthisdefectivecopy.Bycontrast,anArmenianscribeortranslatorofthefifthcenturywasabletounderstandthisshorthand,withtheresultthattherestofthecommentarylackinginGreekis preservedinArmenianinstead.8
Part3.2andPart3.3.
WendyMayer, “TheinsandoutsoftheChrysostomletter-collection:newwaysoflookingat alimitedcorpus,” in CollectingEarlyChristianLetters.FromtheApostlePaultoLateAntiquity, ed.BronwenNeilandPaulineAllen(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2015),143–5.
SC,272:12–13.
SC,304:11–14.
ScribesalsoshapedthereceptionofChrysostom ’sworksinotherways. ManuscriptsandprintededitionspresentChrysostom’shomiliesinseries,giving theimpressionthathepreachedtheminimmediatesuccession.Yettheseseries areoftenartificial,theresultofscribesbringingtogetherhomiliesonthesame themethatwerepreachedincompletelydifferenttimesandplaces.Pauline AllenandWendyMayerhaveforinstanceshownthatJohnpreachedsomeofthe HomiliesonColossians atAntioch,andothersaboutadecadelateratConstantinople. 9 AswellasrationalisingthestructureofChrysostom’shomilies,later scribesandscholarssometimeschangedtheircontent,polishingthemintoa moreliterarystyle.ManyworksbyChrysostomthereforeexistinone ‘rough’ versionandatleastonerevisedor ‘smooth’ recension,ascanbeseen,forexample, inmanuscriptsof Deuirginitate (CPG4313), QuodChristussitDeus (CPG4326), De sanctoBabyla (CPG4347), DeSS.IuventinoetMaximo (CPG4349), DeS.Pelagia (CPG4350), Sermocumiretinexilium (CPG4397), HomiliainSanctumPascha (CPG4408), Sermones1–8inGenesim (CPG4410), DeDavideetSaule (CPG4412), Inillud:VidiDominum (CPG4417), InIohannemhomiliae1–88 (CPG4425), In ActaApostolorum (CPG4426),thehomiliesonRomans(CPG4427),I-IICorinthians(CPG4428–4429),Galatians(CPG4430),Ephesians(CPG4431),Philippians (CPG4432),Colossians(CPG4433),I-IIThessalonians(CPG4434–4435),I-IITimothy(CPG4436–4437),Titus(CPG4438),andPhilemon(CPG4439),aswellas De resurrectione (CPG4341),and Adilluminandoscatechesis3 (CPG4467).10 Indeed,
PaulineAllenandWendyMayer, “ChrysostomandthePreachingofHomiliesinSeries:A NewApproachtotheTwelveHomilies InepistulamadColossenses (CPG4433),” Orientalia ChristianaPeriodica 60(1994):29–38.
Inorder: SC,125:77–81;AnthonyGlaise, “Le QuodChristussitDeus attribuéàJeanChrysostom(CPG4326):edition,traductionetcommentaire” (PhDdiss.,UniversityofTours,2020), 284–91; SC,362:63–4; SC,595:91–3;SeverJ.Voicu, “L’immaginediCrisostomoneglispuri,” in Chrysostomosbilderin1600Jahren.FacettenderWirkungsgeschichteeinesKirchenvaters ,ed. MartinWallraffandRudolfBrändle(Berlin:WalterdeGruyter,2008),64;WendyMayer, “MediaManipulationasaToolinReligiousConflict:ControllingtheNarrativeSurrounding theDepositionofJohnChrysostom,” in ReligiousConflictfromEarlyChristianitytotheRiseof Islam ,ed.WendyMayerandBronwenNeil(Berlin:WalterdeGruyter,2013),154; SC , 561:231–5; SC,433:84–113; DeDavideetSaulehomiliaetres,ed.FrancescaPrometeaBarone (Turnhout:Brepols,2008),l; SC,277:31–3;PaulW.Harkins, “TheTextTraditionofChrysostom’sCommentaryonJohn,” in StudiaPatristica.Vol.VII,ed.FrankL.Cross(Berlin:Akademie-Verlag,1966),210 – 20;FrancisT.Gignac, “ EvidenceforDeliberateScribalRevisionin Chrysostom’s HomiliesontheActsoftheApostles, ” in Nova&Vetera.PatristicStudiesinHonor ofThomasPatrickHalton,ed.JohnPetruccione(Washington,DC:TheCatholicUniversityof AmericaPress,1998),209–25;MariaKonstantinidou, “TheDoubleTraditionofJohnChrysostom’sExegeticalWorks:RevisionsRevisited,” in StudiaPatristica,vol.114,ed.MarkusVinzent, GuillaumeBady,andCatherineBroc-Schmezer(Leuven:Peeters,2021),16 –22; Interpretatio
