Thursday, June 14, 2018

Theodulf Bibles

Theodulf (760–821 CE; see Ann Freeman's article) became bishop of Orléans (75 miles south of Paris) in 797/8. He wrote in many genres: poems, letters, theological and liturgical treatises. Charlemagne died in 814, and his son, Louis the Pious, accused Theodulf of political intrigue, which led to Theodulf's resigning his see in 817. He died in 821 and was buried in Angers (125 miles west of Orléans), where he had spent most of his last years. Apparently, his principal work was the unattributed Libri Carolini, a polemical response to the Second Council of Nicaea (787). This work, written for Charlemagne, concentrated on criticizing the supposed position taken at Nicaea in regard to icons. According to Wikipedia:
The work appears to have been very largely a polemic based on a misunderstanding of the actual position taken by the Byzantine church, which was quietly archived when this was realized, probably in Rome.
(For more on the Libri Carolini, see this other article by Ann Freeman.)

Theodulf's revision was not the first during the reign of Charlemagne (see this article).

There were also:
--Maurdramnus, abbot of Corbie (772–781). Five of twelve volumes survive at Amiens (90 miles north of Paris; BM Amiens, 67911 and 12). This is the first known example of the caroline minuscule.
--Angilram, bishop of Metz (d. 791), who produced a single-volume Bible, a single manuscript preserved at Metz (200 miles east of Paris; Bibliothèque Municipale 7), but destroyed in 1944.
--Alcuin of York (c. 735–804), abbot at Tours (796–804), who produced the edition that became the most popular. Tours is 75 miles southwest of Orléans. There survive 18 complete and 28 incomplete pandects from the scriptorium at Tours, copied in the first half of the ninth century. The earliest of these is: St Gall, Stiftsbibliothek, 75 (images). Another important one is the Bible of Moutier-Grandval, London, Add. 10546 (see here). Alcuin's revision concentrated on issues of Latin grammar and style.

Theodulf wanted to attain the original translation from Jerome, the hebraica veritas. Theodulf himself knew neither Hebrew nor Greek, but he had a good knowledge of the Latin manuscript tradition, and chose variants among the manuscripts. Variant readings he sometimes recorded in the margin. He continued this work of revision for the rest of his life. This is why the six preserved Theodulf Bibles each contains a different state of the revision. This fact also helps to establish relative dates for the six Bibles. 

"Theodulf's text was continuously revised during his lifetime, and was conceived as an accessible reference work, and so he chose a very small, three column 61-line format, with quires of five leaves" (Ganz, p. 53). 

Each of Theodulf's six Bibles (except for the Le Puy Bible) is available in online digital images; references given below. 

In chronological order: 
  1. Stuttgart, Württemburgische Landesbibliothek HB II, 16, deriving from the Konstanz Cathedral. This Bible lacks Gen 1:1–Lev 23:32; Josh 2:11–7:23; Baruch 6; Lamentations; Job; Psa 1:1–144:21; 2 Par 32:26–35:20; Sir 31:33–37:17; 1 Mac 1:27–3:56; 2 Mac 15:30–end. In the NT, all that remain are Paul's letters (including Hebrews), the letter of James, and 1 Pet 1:1–4:3. Digital images here.
  2. Saint-Hubert Bible (abbey of Saint-Hubert), now in London, British Library Add. 24 142. Lacks: Gen 1:1–49:6; most of the Minor Prophets (Hos 6:8–Mal); 1 Pet 4:3–end of the NT (which would include Acts and Rev). Digital images here
  3. Le Puy Bible, Trésor de la Cathedral (at the Le Puy Cathedral).
  4. Orléans Bible (Paris, BnF, lat. 9380) = Codex Mesmianus, because it was at one point acquired by the family of Mesmes. Digital images here. This Bible has variants from Alcuin.  
  5. Saint-Germain Bible (Abbey of Saint-Germain-de-Prés), now Paris, BnF, lat. 11 937. This manuscript is preserved only from Gen 18:20–Psa 92:5. The evidence for marginal readings attributed to the Hebrew Bible in this manuscript has made it the object of study by Graves (231–41) and Candiard and Chevalier Royet. "It seems that the purpose of these Hebrew scholia was to indicate to the Latin reader what the Hebrew contained according to the strictest and most literal understanding. They were presumably meant as a study tool for the reader interested in Hebrew" (Graves 231–32). Graves' comprehensive study of the Hebrew marginal notes in 1 Samuel is based on the apparatus in the Roman Vulgate (232n48). Digital images here. Jerome's prologue to Samuel begins on what is labeled on the manuscript as fol. 62, but the digital image is given the number 72. The text of Samuel begins at image 73, the right inside column. According to Candiard and Chevalier-Royet (21 with n30), in these last two manuscripts Theodulf is no longer chiefly concerned with comparing Latin manuscripts: the marginal glosses (numbering around 2000 in the Saint-Germain manuscript) are almost always preceded by an 'h', signaling a reading based on the Hebrew text, whereas there are only a few notes preceded by 'al' (= alii), signaling a reading derived from another Latin witness. 
  6. Copenhagen, Kongelige Bibliotek NKS1, previously at the Carcassonne Cathedral. This Bible exists in fragments: Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Dan 1:1–6:5. This Bible also presents abundant marginal notes offering comparisons with the Hebrew Bible. Digital images here
(See also another fragment here.)

The first four Bibles were produced around 800, the fifth and sixth one later on. Only the Le Puy and Orléans Bibles are complete. At least three other Theodulf Bibles are known to have once existed. 

Theodulf began his work on the biblical text only after he became bishop, and his work was interrupted by his deposition. 

The Theodulf Bibles were much more scholarly than Alcuin's with their marginal notes and concern for the Hebrew text, but they were also harder to use and presented no unified text. Alcuin's more straightforward and more magnificent volumes predominated, aided by the rapid production rate at Tours (about 2 Bibles per year for the first half of the ninth century). 

Friday, June 8, 2018

Gabler on Theology: Bibliography

The German theologian Johann Philipp Gabler (1753–1826) is often given credit for distinguishing biblical theology from systematic theology, which he did in his inaugural lecture as professor at the University of Altdorf. This university was founded in 1578 in Altdorf bei Nürnberg (i.e., near—15 miles east of—Nuremberg). It's a small town, current population around 15,000. The university closed in 1809.

According to Wikipedia:
Gabler is widely considered to be the father of modern biblical theology because of his 1787 inaugural address at University of Altdorf: On the Correct Distinction Between Dogmatic and Biblical Theology and the Right Definition of Their Goals [citing Köstenberger]. Gabler sharply distinguished between biblical and dogmatic theology. For him, biblical theology was simply historical investigation into the beliefs of the biblical authors as they stand in the text. It is purely descriptive and uninfluenced by the viewpoints of modern thinkers. On the other hand, dogmatic theology is a systematized construction, built on the foundation of biblical theology and contextualized — applied to the context or era in which it is to be proclaimed.
Of course, the address was delivered and published originally in Latin, and the Latin title is De justo discrimine theologiae biblicae et dogmaticae regundisque recte utriusque finibus (Altdorf bei Nürnberg: Monath, 1787). The original publication is available here. (On the Roman numerals used in the date notation, see Wikipedia.)

An English translation and commentary was produced by theologian John Sandys-Wunsch and the medievalist Laurence Eldredge: “J. P. Gabler and the Distinction between Biblical and Dogmatic Theology: Translation, Commentary and Discussion of his Originality,” Scottish Journal of Theology 33 (1980): 133–58. The full text of their article is not available freely online, but the brief introduction and the entire translation has been made available here.

This translation is not based on the original publication, which was unavailable to Sandys-Wunsch and Eldredge, but rather on the reprint in Gabler’s (posthumously published) collected works (vol. 2, pp. 179–98, here).

According to Sandys-Wunsch and Eldredge (149n2), Gabler was recognized as the patriarch of biblical theology first by D. C. G. Cölln, Biblische Theologie, 2 vols. (Leipzig: Barth, 1836), 1.22–23 (here), and the first biblical theology to mention Gabler’s inaugural address was W. M. L. de Wette, Lehrbuch der christlichen Dogmatik I: Biblische Dogmatik Alten und Neuen Testaments (Berlin: Realschulbuchhandlung, 1813), available here, p. 30 (point c).

Monday, June 4, 2018

Naḥal Ḥever Minor Prophets Scroll: Digital Images

Digital images of the Greek Minor Prophets Scroll from Naḥal Ḥever are available at the Leon Levy DSS Digital Library website here, but (as with all the digital images there) they can be a little hard to navigate because there's no index. Each image does contain a plate number that corresponds—not to the plate numbers of the DJD edition, but—to the inventory number of the Palestine Archaeological Museum, which are noted in parentheses on the plates of the DJD edition. These numbers were a help in matching the digital image to the corresponding DJD plates.

I have been able to find in the digital images every piece of the scroll represented on the plates in the DJD edition, except for fragments 1–5 of the Additional Fragments on Plate XX, though I didn't expend much energy searching for these additional fragments. I have gone through all 111 images available at the website, though I ignored some small pieces in the images that I couldn't readily identify in the DJD plates.

The following index is arranged according to the plates in the DJD edition (vol. 8, ed. E. Tov, 1990). I am not sure why there are so many high quality images available online for certain fragments and not for others. Personally, I would much appreciate better images for column 2.

Plate 1: col. 2–4 (B&W)

Plate 2: Col. 2, Jonah 1:14–2:7

Plate 3: Col 3, Jonah 3:2–4:5

Plate 4: Col. 4, Micah 1:1–7

Plate 4: Col. 5, Micah 1:7–8

Plate 5: Col. 6, Micah 2:7–9; 3:4–6

Plate 5: Col. 7, Micah 4:3–5

Plate 6: Col. 8, Micah 4:6–10, 5:1–4

Plate 7: Col. 9, Micah 5:4–7

Plate 7: Col. 13, Nahum 1:13–14

Plate 8: Col. 14, Nahum 2:5–10, 13–14; 3:3

Plate 9: Col. 15, Nahum 3:6–17

Plate 10: Col. 16, Habakkuk 1:5–11

Plate 11: Col. 17, Habakkuk 1:14–2:8

Plate 12: Col. 18, Habakkuk 2:13–20

Plate 13: Col. 19, Habakkuk 3:8–15

Plate 14: Col. 20, Zephaniah 1:1–6

Plate 15: Col. 21, Zephaniah 1:13–18

Plate 15: Col. 22–23, Zephaniah 2:9–10 \\ Zephaniah 3:6–7

Plate 16: Col. 28–29, Zechariah 1:1–4 \\ Zechariah 1:12–14

Plate 17: Col. 30–31, Zechariah 2:1–4; 2:7–12 \\ Zechariah 2:16–3:2; 3:3–7

Plate 18: Col. 17–23 (color, upside down)

Plate 19: Col. B1–2, Zechariah 8:19–21; 23 \\ Zechariah 8:23–9:5

Plate 20: Additional Fragments

Fragments I can’t find in the DJD plates: