No CrossRef data available.
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.
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: 06 September 2021
For over a century, studies on Marcion have cited a quotation attributed to him in a fragmentary Syriac manuscript: London, British Library, Add. 17215 (fols. 30–3). An English translation of the relevant passage appeared in 1893, but no subsequent study has returned to the Syriac text itself. While this text has hitherto been cited as an anonymous Syriac source, this article identifies it as a letter by Jacob of Serugh (d. 520/1) and offers preliminary remarks on the implications of this identification for future research on Marcion's Gospel and his thought.
I am grateful to Christopher Zeichmann for providing detailed feedback on this article, to Grigory Kessel for helping me access the manuscript, and to Mark Bilby for bibliographic suggestions. I would also like to thank the anonymous peer reviewer for help with the final revisions and the British Library Board for permission to publish an image of the manuscript. The research for this project was funded by the BMBF-Project ‘Cultural Exchange from Syria to Ethiopia’.
1 Vinzent, M., Marcion and the Dating of the Synoptic Gospels (StPatr Supplement 2; Leuven: Peeters, 2014), especially 277–82Google Scholar.
2 Klinghardt, M., Das älteste Evangelium und die Entstehung der kanonischen Evangelien (2 vols.; Texte und Arbeiten zum neutestamentlichen Zeitalter 60; Tübingen: Francke, 2015 1, 20202)Google Scholar.
3 See, for example, the forums on the new literature on Marcion's Gospel in NTS 63 (2017) 318–34 and ZAC 21 (2017) 1–163.
4 BeDuhn, J., The First New Testament: Marcion's Scriptural Canon (Salem, OR: Polebridge, 2013) 99–200Google Scholar (English translation with commentary); Roth, D. T., The Text of Marcion's Gospel (NTTSD 49; Leiden: Brill, 2015) 412–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Klinghardt, Das älteste Evangelium (20151), ii.455–1168; Gramaglia, P. A., Marcione e il Vangelo (di Luca). Un confronto con Matthias Klinghardt (Turin: Accademia University Press, 2017) 120–359Google Scholar (Italian translation with commentary); C. Gianotto, ed., A. Nicolotti, trans., Il Vangelo di Marcione (Nuovo Universale Einaudi 22; Turin: Einaudi, 2019) 3–204; Klinghardt, Das älteste Evangelium (20202), ii.534–1317.
5 Harnack, A. von, Marcion: Das Evangelium vom fremden Gott (TUGAL 45; Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1921 1, 19242)Google Scholar.
6 As emphasised strongly in Lieu, J. M., Marcion and the Making of a Heretic (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
7 A new translation of the text appears in section 3 below.
8 Wright, W., Catalogue of Syriac Manuscripts in the British Museum Acquired since the Year 1838 (3 vols.; London: Gilbert and Rivington, 1870–2)Google Scholar, with a discussion of the acquisition history at iii.xiv–xv.
9 Wright, Catalogue, ii.1016.
10 The same or a similar hand is used on all the first three folios, although the writing is thicker on folios 31 and 32 than on folio 30. The script on folio 33 is in a different hand. My analysis of folios 30 to 32 focused on the following three features: an Esṭrangelā ʾālap̄ in all positions, a Serṭo hēh with a closed left loop and a semkaṯ with the left loop angled upwards and higher than the right loop. On this basis I could find four comparable manuscripts, all dating between the late seventh and the ninth century: (1) London, British Library, Add. 17134 (674/5); (2) Mardin, Church of the Forty Martyrs, 309 (CFMM 00309) (8th/9th cent.); (3) London, British Library, Add. 14485 (823/4); and (4) London, British Library, Add. 12138 (899). The second manuscript is described as an example of ‘Usual Estrangela’ in A. C. McCollum, ‘Syriac Paleography’, Hill Museum & Manuscript Library: School, accessed 23 February 2021, online at www.vhmmlschool.org/syriac. I identified the remaining three manuscripts by utilising the following database: M. P. Penn, ‘Digital Analysis of Syriac Handwriting’, 2019–, online at http://dash.stanford.edu/. While the hand mostly conforms to the Syriac Esṭrangelā script, it does have some features reflecting developments associated with Serṭo script, as explored in Bush, K. et al. , ‘Challenging the Estrangela / Serto Divide: Why the Standard Model of Syriac Scripts Just Doesn't Work’, Hug 21 (2018) 43–80Google Scholar.
11 That is, Robert Lubbock Bensly, who had died earlier in the year.
12 W. E. Barnes, ‘A Syriac Ms. (Add. 17215) in the British Museum’, The Academy 1120 (21 October 1893) 344 (emphasis original).
13 Barnes, ‘A Syriac Ms.’, 344 (emphasis and both ellipses original). Barnes indicates that the word ‘Marcion’ is a conjecture suggested to him by Francis Crawford Burkitt, who had also examined the manuscript.
14 See Zahn's own reconstruction of this part of the text: T. Zahn, Geschichte des neutestamentlichen Kanons (Erlangen: Andreas Deichert, 1889–92), ii.ii.455–6. Here he refers to Tertullian, Marc. 4.7 (E. Evans, Tertullian: Adversus Marcionem (OECT; Oxford: Clarendon, 1972) 274.28–9).
15 Zahn, T., ‘Neue Quellenforschung zum Diatesseron’, Theologisches Literaturblatt 17 (1896) 1–4, 17–20, at 19Google Scholar.
16 T. Zahn, Einleitung in das Neue Testament (Leipzig: Deichert, 1906–73) ii.396 n. 18. The second volume appeared in 1907.
17 Zahn, T., ‘Ein verkanntes Fragment von Marcions Antithesen’, NKZ 21 (1910) 371–7Google Scholar.
18 Quoted in German translation in Zahn, ‘Ein verkanntes Fragment’, 371.
19 Zahn, ‘Ein verkanntes Fragment’, 371 n. 2.
20 Zahn, ‘Ein verkanntes Fragment’, 372: ‘Denn Marcion … sagt, daß unser Herr nicht von einem Weibe geboren wurde, sondern das Gebiet des Schöpfers stahl und herabkam und zum erstenmal zwischen Jerusalem und Jericho erschien, gleich einem Menschensohn in Gestalt und Bild und Gleichheit, aber ohne unseren Leib. Und er (Marcion) bringt in seiner Weise die Geschichte der gebenedeiten Maria in seiner Lehre vor und bekennt nicht, daß er (Jesus) einen Leib von ihr empfing und im Fleisch erschien, wie die heiligen Schriften lehren’ (emphasis original).
21 Zahn, ‘Ein verkanntes Fragment’, 374–5.
22 Zahn, ‘Ein verkanntes Fragment’, 375.
23 Zahn, ‘Ein verkanntes Fragment’, 377 states that Marcion's teaching must have been similar to the following: ‘Unser Gott und Heiland ist nicht einer der vom Weibe Geborenen, sondern ist im 15. Jahr des Tiberius als ein spiritus salutaris vom Himmel herab in diese arge Welt des Schöpfergottes gekommen und in Menschengestalt erschienen, um, wie jener Samariter im Evangelium an der Straße, die von Jerusalem nach Jericho führt, die von Räubern überfallenen, mißhandelten und dem Tode nahgebrachten Menschen, als ein Fremdling seiner Herkunft nach, aber ihr Nächster durch seine barmherzige Liebe, vom Tode zu erretten, ihre Wunden zu lindern und in freigiebigster Weise für ihre völlige Heilung Sorge zu tragen.’
24 References to Zahn's discussion of the passage do appear before Harnack, but they do not offer any further treatment of the anonymous Syriac source. A summary of Zahn's article appeared in BZ 8 (1910) 411. Zahn's interpretation of this quotation is also briefly mentioned in Schäfers, J., Eine altsyrische antimarkionitische Erklärung von Parabeln des Herrn und zwei andere altsyrische Abhandlungen zu Texten des Evangeliums mit Beiträgen zu Tatians Diatessaron und Markions Neuem Testament (NTAbh 6; Münster: Aschendorff, 1917) 34 n. 1Google Scholar.
25 Harnack, Marcion (19211), 165*–166*: ‘iii, 1a Ἐν τῷ ιε' ἔτει Τιβερίου Καίσαρος ἐπὶ τῶν χρόνων Πιλάτου iv, 31 κατῆλθεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς (Χριστὸς[Ἰησοῦς]?) (ἀπὸ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ?) εἰς Καφαρναούμ, (πόλιν τῆς Γαλιλαῖας [Ἰουδαίας]?) καὶ ἦν διδάσκων (αὐτοὺς?) ἐν τῇ συναγωγῇ.’ There are no differences in the text in the second edition: Harnack, Marcion (19242), 183*–184*.
26 Harnack, Marcion (19211), 166*–167*.
27 Harnack, Marcion (19211), 167*: ‘Woher die Kunde stammt, Jesus sei zuerst zwischen Jerusalem und Jericho erschienen, habe ich nicht ermitteln können.’
28 See Harnack, Marcion (19211), 283*: ‘Ein unbekannter Syrer (Ephraem?).’
29 H. von Soden, ‘A. von Harnacks Marcion’, ZKG 40, n.F., 3 (1922) 191–206, at 199.
30 Harnack, Marcion (19242), 185*, 362*.
31 Monselewski, W., Der barmherzige Samariter: Eine auslegungsgeschichtliche Untersuchung zu Lukas 10, 25–37 (BGBE 5; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1967) 18–21Google Scholar.
32 Origen, Hom. Luc. 34 (M. Rauer, ed., Die Homilien zu Lukas in der Übersetzung des Hiernoymus und die griechischen Reste der Homilien und des Lukas-Kommentars (Origenes Werke 9; GCS 49; Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 19592) 190.21–191.1 (Greek)): εἰς Χριστὸν τὸν ἐκ Μαρίας σάρκα φορέσαντα. In Jerome's Latin translation, this section of the homily is attributed to ‘one of the presbyters’ (quidam de presbyteris) (Rauer, Die Homilien zu Lukas, 190.14 (Latin)). While the mention of the presbyter does appear in the Greek fragment, the reference to ‘Christ who was born of Mary’ does not appear in the Latin.
33 Orbe, A., Parábolas evangélicas en San Ireneo (2 vols.; BAC 331–2; Madrid: Biblioteca de autores cristianos, 1972) i.105Google Scholar: ‘Decía Marción que Nuestro Señor no nació de una mujer, sino que arrebató el puesto del demiurgo y descendió y apareció por vez primera entre Jerusalén y Jericó(?), como un hijo de hombre en forma y aspecto y semejanza, mas sin nuestro cuerpo.’ Orbe (i.105 n. 2) cites Barnes’ article in The Academy but seems to indicate that he only knows of this article through Harnack (‘según A. Harnack’). It is unclear whether he relied on Zahn or Harnack for his translation. But the language of ‘de una mujer’ seems to correspond to Zahn's ‘von einem Weibe’ more than Harnack's ‘of woman’.
34 Orbe, Parábolas evangélicas, i.105–8.
35 G. Sfameni Gasparro, ‘Variazioni esegetiche sulla parabola del buon Samaritano. Dal “Presbitero” di Origene ai dualisti medievali’, Studi in onore di Anthos Ardizzoni (ed. E. Livera and G. Aurelio Privitera; 2 vols.; Filologia e critica 25; Rome: Ateneo & Bizzarri, 1978) ii.951–1012, at 966–7.
36 Sfameni Gasparro, ‘Variazioni’, ii.966: ‘Marcione (…) disse che nostro Signore non fu generato da una donna ma rubò il campo del Creatore e scese giù e per la prima volta apparve tra Gerusalemme e Gerico, simile a un figlio dell'uomo in figura e immagine e somiglianza, ma senza il nostro corpo.’ The origin of the quotation in Zahn's article is noted on Sfameni Gasparro, ‘Variazioni’, ii.999 n. 118.
37 Sfameni Gasparro, ‘Variazioni’, ii.968: ‘il polemista siriaco avrebbe registrato allora non la dottrina originaria di Marcione ma una credenza dei marcioniti contemporanei’.
38 Roukema, R., ‘The Good Samaritan in Ancient Christianity’, VC 58 (2004) 56–74, at 57CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
39 Roukema, ‘The Good Samaritan’, 57: ‘Our Lord was not born from a woman, but stole the domain of the Creator and came down and appeared for the first time between Jerusalem and like a human being in form and image and likeness, but without our body.’ Roukema (57 n. 8) notes that the English translation is based upon Zahn.
40 Roukema, ‘The Good Samaritan’, 58.
41 Tyson, J. B., Marcion and Luke-Acts: A Defining Struggle (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2006) 156–7 n. 48Google Scholar.
42 Bovon, F., L’Évangile selon saint Luc (4 vols.; CNT 3; Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1991–2009) ii.91 n. 55Google Scholar mentions Zahn's article.
43 Aland, B., ‘Marcion/Marcioniten’, TRE 22 (1992) 89–101, at 89–90Google Scholar.
44 The first reconstruction is summarised in Williams, D. S., ‘Reconsidering Marcion's Gospel’, JBL 108 (1989) 477–96Google Scholar. Williams only takes into account quotations of Marcion's Gospel that have directly parallels in Tertullian and Epiphanius, thus excluding the anonymous Syriac source. The article is based upon a Master's thesis by the same author that I have not been able to consult. The second reconstruction appears in Tsutsui, K., ‘Das Evangelium Marcions: Ein neuer Versuch der Textrekonstruktion’, AJBI 18 (1992) 67–132Google Scholar. Tsutsui focuses on the three primary witnesses of Tertullian, Adamantius and Epiphanius and does not engage the minor sources at length. For the opening of the Gospel, Tsutsui (77) refers readers to ‘[w]eitere Bezeugungen und Anspielungen’ in Harnack, which would include the anonymous Syriac source.
45 Löhr, W., ‘Markion’, RAC 24 (2012) 147–73, at 151Google Scholar.
46 BeDuhn, The First New Testament, 40–6.
47 BeDuhn, J., ‘New Studies of Marcion's Evangelion’, ZAC 21 (2017) 8–24, at 9–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
48 Klinghardt, Das älteste Evangelium (20151), i.55; (20202), i.62.
49 Klinghardt, Das älteste Evangelium (20202), i.450–3.
50 Gianotto, Il Vangelo, lxxvii, does not list it among the minor sources. The source does not appear to be referenced in Gramaglia, Marcione.
51 The discussion of the sources appears in Roth, The Text, 46–78. For a convenient listing of these sources, see BeDuhn, ‘New Studies’, 9 n. 7.
52 Roth, The Text, 399.
53 Roth, The Text, 399 n. 13 states that the translation he used came from Roukema, while Roukema, ‘The Good Samaritan’, 57 n. 8 cites Zahn's translation as the source.
54 The critical edition of Jacob of Serugh's letters appears in G. Olinder, ed., Iacobi Sarugensis epistulae quotquot supersunt (CSCO 110, Scriptores Syri 57; Leuven: Peeters, 1937). But a few studies have corrected Olinder's text, two of which are relevant to Letter 23: Olinder, G., The Letters of Jacob of Sarug: Comments on an Edition (LUÅ, n.f., avd. 1, 34.1; Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1939)Google Scholar; Albert, M., trans., Les lettres de Jacques de Saroug (Patrimoine Syriaque 3; Kaslik, Lebanon: Parole de l'Orient, 2004)Google Scholar. In addition to the critical edition, I have cited the pages in Albert's French translation, which is the most accessible of the published translations of the corpus.
55 This work has been published on the basis of other manuscripts and the fragments correspond to the following sections: Gregory Thaumaturgus, To Theopompus, on the Impassibility and Passibility of God (J.-B.-F. Pitra, Analecta sacra spicilegio solesmensi parata (7 vols.; Paris, 1876–91) iv.118.22–119.9 (= fol. 33r), 119.20–1 (= fol. 33v); M. Slusser, trans., St. Gregory Thaumaturgas: Life and Works (FC 98; Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1998) 171, 172). I am grateful to Roger Akhrass and Boško Erić for helping me identify this work.
56 On Jacob, see Brock, S. P., ‘Yaʿqub of Serugh’, Gorgias Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Syriac Heritage (ed. Brock, S. P. et al. ; Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias, 2011) 433–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar, now published in an electronic edition at https://gedsh.bethmardutho.org/Yaqub-of-Serugh. The brief description of Jacob's life offered here is based on his own writings or other sixth-century writings. For the sources and further details, see Forness, P. M., Preaching Christology in the Roman Near East: A Study of Jacob of Serugh (OECS; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018) 4–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
57 For the most comprehensive listing of the homilies by incipit, see Akhrass, R.-Y. and Syryany, I., eds., 160 Unpublished Homilies of Jacob of Serugh (Damascus: Department of Syriac Studies – Syriac Orthodox Patriarchate, 2017) i.xiv–xxiiiGoogle Scholar. A useful thematic description of the homilies appears in Brock, S. P., ‘Jacob of Serugh: A Select Bibliographical Guide’, Jacob of Serugh and his Times: Studies in Sixth-Century Syriac Christianity (ed. Kiraz, G. A.; Gorgias Eastern Christian Studies 8; Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias, 2010) 219–44, at 221–35Google Scholar.
58 Maron of Anazarbus also corresponded with Jacob's contemporaries Philoxenus of Mabbug (d. 523) and Severus of Antioch (d. 538). On his correspondence with these figures, see de Halleux, A., Philoxène de Mabbog. Sa vie, ses écrits, sa théologie (Leuven: Imprimerie orientaliste, 1963) 211–14Google Scholar; F. Alpi, La route royale. Sévère d'Antioche et les églises d'Orient (512–518) (2 vols.; Bibliothèque archéologique et historique 188; Beirut: Institut français du Proche-Orient, 2009) ii.149.
59 Jacob of Serugh, Letter 23 (Olinder, Epistulae, 169.3–5; Albert, Les lettres, 220).
60 Jacob of Serugh, Letter 23 (Olinder, Epistulae, 184.4–7; Albert, Les lettres, 238).
61 Jacob of Serugh, Letter 23 (Olinder, Epistulae, 169.19–21 (Question); 170.17–178.10 (Response); Albert, Les lettres, 221, 222–31).
62 Jacob of Serugh, Letter 23 (Olinder, Epistulae, 169.22–5 (Question); Albert, Les lettres, 221).
63 Jacob of Serugh, Letter 23 (Olinder, Epistulae, 169.25–7 (Question); 178, 11–182.8 (Combined Response to Questions 2–3); Albert, Les lettres, 221, 231–6).
64 Jacob of Serugh, Letter 23 (Olinder, Epistulae, 169.28–170.3 (Question); 182, 9–190.11 (Response); Albert, Les lettres, 221, 236–45).
65 Jacob of Serugh, Letter 23 (Olinder, Epistulae, 170.4–7 (Question); 190.12–195.31 (Response); Albert, Les lettres, 221, 245–52).
66 Jacob of Serugh, Letter 23 (Olinder, Epistulae, 170.8–11 (Question); 196.1–203.11 (Response); Albert, Les lettres, 221–2, 252–61).
67 Jacob of Serugh, Letter 23 (Olinder, Epistulae, 196.24–197.1; 198.28–9; Albert, Les lettres, 253, 255).
68 Jacob of Serugh, Letter 23 (Olinder, Epistulae, 196.27–197.2; 199.11–14; Albert, Les lettres, 253, 256).
69 The phrase ‘that he received from the seed of Abraham’ 
is admittedly difficult to bring out in English. Olinder, Comments, 93 proposed adding 
as the understood object of 
: ‘he received [his beginning] from the seed of Abraham’. This seems too strong an emendation, especially since there are now two witnesses to the text. My translation of this phrase parallels that found in Albert, Les lettres, 258.
70 Jacob of Serugh, Letter 23 (Olinder, Epistulae, 200.25–201.4; Albert, Les lettres, 258). The legible text on British Library, Add. 17215, fol. 30r begins with the word 
(201.1; probably spelled 
). Although the text is sometimes difficult to read for the remainder of the passage, there do not appear to be any deviations from the critical edition.
71 If there is a Greek text behind the Syriac quotation, the Syriac word ‘maker’ (
) may well correspond to Greek δημιούργος (see Orbe's translation in n. 33 above), although this word is also used to translate ποιήτης. See R. Payne Smith, Thesaurus Syriacus (2 vols.; Oxford: Clarendon, 1879) ii.2775.
72 Jacob of Serugh, Letter 23 (Olinder, Epistulae, 201.4–15; Albert, Les lettres, 258). Olinder, Comments, 94 recommends two changes to the punctuation that I have not adopted here on the basis of my examination of the primary manuscript witness (London, British Library, Add. 14587, fol. 70r–v). There are only four differences in the consonantal text between the critical edition and the text in London, British Library, Add. 17215, fol. 30r: 
for 
(201.7); 
for 
(201.8); 
for 
(201.8); and 
for 
(201.11). Only the second of these (
for 
) affects the translation: rather than ‘for he did not have a body’, the passage would be translated as ‘which [i.e. the likeness] did not have a body’.
73 Jerusalem appears in a summary of the stations in Jesus’ life in response to the first question: Jacob of Serugh, Letter 23 (Olinder, Epistulae, 177.13; Albert, Les lettres, 230). Jericho appears in response to the fourth question when describing the stations in Elijah's life: Jacob of Serugh, Letter 23 (Olinder, Epistulae, 185.15, 19, 22; Albert, Les lettres, 240).
74 On the attribution of this view to Marcion, especially in the works of Tertullian, see Markschies, C., Gottes Körper: Jüdische, christliche und pagane Gottesvorstellungen in der Antike (Munich: Beck, 2016) 380–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
75 The literature on heresiology is vast and rapidly expanding. On the broader field, see F. Ruani, ed., Les controverses religieuses en syriaque (Études Syriaques 13; Paris: Geuthner, 2016). On Marcion in Syriac, see Rompay, L. Van, ‘Marcion’, Gorgias Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Syriac Heritage (ed. Brock, S. P. et al. ; Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias, 2011) 266–7Google Scholar, electronic edition at https://gedsh.bethmardutho.org/Marcion.
76 Jacob of Serugh, Letter 17 (Olinder, Epistulae, 113.23; Albert, Les lettres, 158).
77 BeDuhn, ‘New Studies’, 11.
78 Epiphanius of Salamis, Pan. 42.11.4 (K. Holl, ed., Epiphanius (Ancoratus und Panarion) (GCS 25, 31, 37; Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1915–33), GCS 31.107.22). As noted by Roth, The Text, 286.
79 Epiphanius of Salamis, Pan. 42.11.4 (Holl, Epiphanius, GCS 31.107.21): τοῦ ἀγγέλου εὐαγγελιζομένου Μαρίαν τὴν παρθένον.
80 Löhr, W., ‘Problems of Profiling Marcion’, Christian Teachers in Second-Century Rome (ed. Snyder, H. G.; Supplements to VC 159; Leiden: Brill, 2020) 109–33, at 130Google Scholar.
81 Klinghardt, Das älteste Evangelium (20202), i.453 identifies the principal difference between the three major and many of the minor sources as ‘ihr expliziter Anspruch, die marcionitische Theologie aus dem Text der marcionitischen Bibel zu widerlegen’.