The Soterios Project revisited: status quaestionis and the future editionby Marc De Groote

Byzantinische Zeitschrift

About

Year
2015
DOI
10.1515/bz-2015-0004
Subject
Literature and Literary Theory / History / Visual Arts and Performing Arts

Similar

Problems the market can't solve

Authors:
The NGO Poverty and Affluence Worki
1992

Charting the Future: Credentialing, Privileging, Quality, and Evaluation in Clinical Ethics Consultation

Authors:
Nancy Neveloff Dubler, Mayris P. Webber, Deborah M. Swiderski, The Faculty and the National Workin
2009

Measuring Quality in Kindergarten Classrooms: Structural Analysis of the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS K–3)

Authors:
Lia E. Sandilos, James C. DiPerna, The Family Life Project Key Investi
2014

Chocolate—more a food than a medicine

Authors:
The Lancet
2005

Text

Marc De Groote

The Soterios Project revisited: status quaestionis and the future edition

Abstract: Not until 2006 could the scholarly community welcome the first critical edition of the 103 Quaestiones et responsiones ascribed to Anastasius of Sinai (CPG 7746; M. Richard / J.A. Munitiz. CCSG, 59). However, this publication did not solve all topics surrounding Anastasius’s work, because 21 Greek manuscripts contain still another florilegium, the so-called Σωτήριος dating from before 900 AD, whose core is formed by 88 ἐρωταποκρίσεις. Between 914 and 927 a

Slavonic translation thereof was made which has been preserved in the so-called Изборник, a codex from 1073. The first and sole critical edition of the Slavonic text was made by O.M. Bodjanskij (1845). The 900th anniversary of the Изборник in 1973 incited the interest in the Greek original. Eventually, in 1996 the decision to edit the Greek text was made, mainly under the impetus of

Prof. em. Dr F.J. Thomson. This edition, originally started by Dr D.Tj. Sieswerda, will be continued by the author of this article in close cooperation with Dr L.

Sels, specialist in Church Slavonic.

Adresse: Prof. Dr. Marc De Groote, Ghent University, Blandijnberg 2, 9000 Gent, Belgium;

Marc.DeGroote@ugent.be

In 2006 the first critical edition of the 103 Quaestiones et responsiones ascribed to

Anastasius of Sinai († shortly after 700; CPG 7746) was published by Marcel Richard and Joseph A. Munitiz.¹ Earlier attempts to edit these ἐρωταποκρίσεις had proven to be both unsuccessful and completely unscholarly, the first one of which was prepared by Jakob Gretser (1562– 1625), Sancti Anastasii Sinaitae,

Patriarchae Antiocheni Quaestiones et Responsiones de varijs argumentis CLIV nunc primum graece et latine cum insigni auctario publicatae, Ingolstadii 1617, 1–685, a publication which was in fact a conflation of the genuine Anastasian

I wholeheartedly wish to thank Prof. em. Dr Francis J. Thomson and Dr Douwe Tj. Sieswerda for their highly appreciated guidance and advice, and for having given me the permission to use the numerous documents and notes they compiled on the matter, as well as Dr Lara Sels for her most valuable critical judgment.  M. Richard / J. A. Munitiz, Anastasii Sinaitae Quaestiones et responsiones. CCSG, .

Turnhout , –.

DOI 10.1515/bz-2015-0004 BZ 2015; 108(1): 63–78

Brought to you by | University of Pennsylvania

Authenticated

Download Date | 7/17/15 2:29 PM collection and a collection of 88 questions that had, as will be shown, been revised on a later date. Moreover, Gretser thought it necessary to append seven additional questions (98a–b, 100a–c, 105a and 109a), which brought the total to 161. More than a century later, Johann Conrad Peez and Felix Bader republished the text unchanged in the Bavarian city of Regensburg, in the 14th volume of Anastasius’ so-called “collected works”.² A new reprint followed in 1860 in

Jacques-Paul Migne’s Patrologia Graeca series, volume 89, 312–824, an edition which Leonhard Masing characterized as überaus elend.³

However, the actual situation is even more complex as no less than 21 Greek manuscripts (see list infra) contain still another florilegium, the so-called Σωτήριος (sc. λόγος; see infra), the core of which is formed by the above-mentioned series of 88 ἐρωταποκρίσεις.⁴ These can be divided in two groups the first of which (No 1–23, 40, 55, 70, 73–74 and 81) contains genuine Anastasian quaestiones dealing with basic moral, or, as Douwe Tj. Sieswerda calls them, pastoral questions:⁵ how to live a correct Christian life? How to bear up against great problems and solve minor ones?⁶ The answers, however, appear for the  J.C. Peez/F. Bader, Opera omnia antehac ab ipsomet auctore accurate recognita opusculis multis notis (…) aucta et illustrata, nunc selecto ordine ad certos titulos revocata ( volumes).

Ratisbonae –, here volume  () –.  L. Masing, Studien zur Kenntnis des Izbornik Svjatoslava vom Jahre  nebst Bemerkungen zu den jüngeren Handschriften ( parts). Archiv für slavische Philologie  (–) –, and  (–) –; here  (–) . – Contemporary scholarship on the erotapokriseis literature can be found in, e.g., A.Volgers/C. Zamagni (eds.), Erotapokriseis:

Early Christian question-and-answer literature in context. Proceedings of the Utrecht Colloquium, – October . Leuven ; Y. Papadoyannakis, Instruction by question and answer in late antiquity: the case of late antique and Byzantine Erotapokriseis, in S.F. Johnson (ed.), Greek literature in late antiquity: dynamism, didacticism, classicism. Aldershot/Burlington (VT) , –. M.-P. Bussières (ed.), La littérature des questions et des réponses dans l’Antiquité profane et chrétienne: de l’enseignement à l’exégèse. Actes du séminaire sur le genre des questions et réponses tenu à Ottawa les  et  septembre . Turnhout ;

I. De Vos/O. Grinchenko, The Quaestiones ad Antiochum ducem. Exploring the Slavonic material. Byzantion  () –.  See F.J. Thomson, Byzantine erotapocritic literature in Slavonic translation with special attention to the important role played by Anastasius Sinaita’s Interrogationes et responsiones in the conversion of the Slavs. Byzantion  () –, here –.  D.Tj. Sieswerda, The Σωτήριος, the original of the Izbornik of . Sacris Erudiri  () –, here .  Examples: No : Ἐάν τις παύσῃ τῆς ἁμαρτίας, ἀρκεῖ τοῦτο πρὸς μετάνοιαν ἢ οὔ; No : Ἐάν τίς ἐστιν γέρων ἢ ἀδύνατος καὶ ὀλιγόψυχος καὶ οὐ δύναται μονάσαι ἢ τὰ τοῦ μοναχοῦ ποιῆσαι, πῶς οὗτος δύναται μετανοῆσαι καὶ σωθῆναι; No : Πόθεν ὁρῶμέν τινας πιστοὺς σωματικὰ πταίσματα ποιοῦντας, ὑπὸ δὲ τοῦ Θεοῦ εὐεργετημένους καὶ κινδύνων διασῳζομένους; No : Πόσον μέτρον τῶν ἰδίων χρημάτων ὀφείλει προσφέρειν τις τῷ Θεῷ; No : Ἆρα πάντα τὰ 64 Byzantinische Zeitschrift Bd. 108/1, 2015: I. Abteilung