1715 Clement edition

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
AdamKvanta
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2023 12:54 am

Re: Comments on Handwriting Analysis and the Mar Saba Letter

Post by AdamKvanta »

StephenGoranson wrote: Sun Apr 21, 2024 4:53 am If a monk wanted to record "Clement" why not do it instead in the Clement edition owned in Mar Saba?
And do we know that Mar Saba owned the Clement edition in that time? Morton Smith wrote (Clement of Alexandria, p. 289):

As to the ultimate fate of the collection of Clement's letters, the likelihood is that it perished in the great fire which Phokylides, Laura 477, dates in the early years of the eighteenth century.

...

Therefore it is presumable that after the fire a large number of loose leaves, almost undamaged, were salvaged from the unburned centers of old MSS.

...

The fragmentary state of the present letter is best explained by supposing it a copy of such an isolated leaf. Ehrhard (Kloster 67) remarks on the large amount of copying of older MSS which went on at Mar Saba in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. No doubt someone's attention was attracted by the surprising content of this isolated folio. He studied the text, corrected it to the best of his ability, and then copied it into the back of the monastery's edition of the letters of Ignatius, since it resembled them in being a letter from an early father, attacking gnostic heretics. For analogies reference may be made to the loss in a fire at Strassburg of the only MS of the Epistle to Diognetus, to the preservation of the Muratorian Canon (also a fragment) on the last pages of a volume of Ambrose, and to the insertion of the Syriac translations of the apocryphal psalms into an empty space in the middle of a MS of the Ketaba de durrasha (Noth, Fünf 3).

StephenGoranson
Posts: 2632
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: Comments on Handwriting Analysis and the Mar Saba Letter

Post by StephenGoranson »

Yes Mar Saba did, a 1715 edition of works of Clement of Alexandria.
Did you not even bother to read A. T.'s report?
StephenGoranson
Posts: 2632
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

1715 Clement edition

Post by StephenGoranson »

According to A. T., Mar Saba had a 1715 edition of Clement's works, so why wouldn't a claimed added text be added there?
StephenGoranson
Posts: 2632
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: 1715 Clement edition

Post by StephenGoranson »

Klēmentos Alexandreōs ta heuriskomena =
Clementis Alexandrini opera, quæ extant /
Clement, of Alexandria Saint; John Potter; George Mortlock; Gentian Hervet

1715
Greek, Ancient [to 1453] Book Book 2 volumes ([16], 642, [2], 643-1060; [4], 206, [50] pages) ; (fol.)
Oxonii : E theatro Sheldoniano, A.D. MDCCXV : Sumptibus Georgii Mortlock, bibliopolæ Londinensis,
...
Find Items About: Clement, (max: 7,066); Potter, John, (max: 123); Mortlock, George, (max: 2); Hervet, Gentian, (max: 162); Sheldonian Theatre, (268)
Title:

Klēmentos Alexandreōs ta heuriskomena =
Clementis Alexandrini opera, quæ extant /
Author(s): Clement, of Alexandria, Saint, approximately 150-approximately 215, author.
Clement,; of Alexandria, Saint,; approximately 150-approximately 215. ; Works.; Latin.
Clement,; of Alexandria, Saint,; approximately 150-approximately 215. ; Works.; Greek.
Potter, John,; 1673 or 1674-1747.
Mortlock, George,; -1722, ; publisher.
Mortlock, George,; -1722, ; bookseller.
Hervet, Gentian,; 1499-1584. ; Commentarius in Clementis Alexandrini exhortatoriam ad gentes orationem.
Corp Author(s): Sheldonian Theatre, ; printer.
Publication: Oxonii : E theatro Sheldoniano, A.D. MDCCXV : Sumptibus Georgii Mortlock, bibliopolæ Londinensis,
Place: England; Oxford.; England; London.
Year: 1715
Description: 2 volumes ([16], 642, [2], 643-1060; [4], 206, [50] pages) ; (fol.)
Language: Greek, Ancient [to 1453]; Parallel Greek and Latin texts in columns.
References: English short title catalogue,; T144834
SUBJECT(S)
Descriptor: Theology, Doctrinal -- Early church, ca. 30-600 -- Early works to 1800.
Theology, Doctrinal -- Early church
Named Person: Clement, of Alexandria, Saint, approximately 150-approximately 215. Works. Latin & Greek. 1715.
Genre/Form: Early works
Gold tooled bindings (Binding) -- 18th century.
Markings (Provenance) -- Ireland -- Cashel (Tipperary)
Time: 30-600
Title Subject: Works (Clement, of Alexandria, Saint)
Note(s): First four words of title transliterated from the Greek./ Continuous pagination: vol. 2 has a half-title only, which is not included in the pagination./ 'Gentiani Herveti Aurelii commentarius in Clementis Alexandrini exhortatoriam ad gentes orationem' has separate half-title, pagination and register.
Class Descriptors: LC: BR65; Dewey: 270.1
Responsibility: recognita & illustrata per Joannem Potterum, episcopum Oxoniensem.
Document Type: Book
Entry: 19980120
Update: 20240202
Accession No: OCLC: 43158355
Database: WorldCat
Secret Alias
Posts: 18922
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: 1715 Clement edition

Post by Secret Alias »

Maybe they didn't think it was really by Clement. Ignatius has a large number of pseudepigraphal letters.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18922
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: 1715 Clement edition

Post by Secret Alias »

Ignatius in Latin also means Seraphim in Hebrew.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18922
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: 1715 Clement edition

Post by Secret Alias »

I am leaning towards a tradition that the monastery knew about the letter before Smith but thought it was a pseudepigraphon. Kallistos must have got his ideas from somewhere. My suspicions get stronger the more Smith and Landau ignore me. I have a low estimation of human sincerity. Tselikas wouldn't have volunteered a letter which contradicted his entire thesis. Doesn't make sense. Either human beings aren't as bad as I think or they are.
StephenGoranson
Posts: 2632
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: 1715 Clement edition

Post by StephenGoranson »

According to WorldCat
the Vossius book was 20 cm, 4to
the 1715 Clement ed was 40 cm, folio--and two volumes.
Plenty of room to annotate
But you SA/SH already erased a claim it was small......
Secret Alias
Posts: 18922
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: 1715 Clement edition

Post by Secret Alias »

Only to replace it with an opinion which doubts Smith and Landau's translation of the certificate. I'd call that honesty. Don't need to do it. You wouldn't do it. I did because I am not wedded to a position. I can be swayed by rational discourse even if it is only in my head. Why would Tselikas have produced the certificate if it said what Smith and Landau say it says? Doesn't add up.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18922
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: 1715 Clement edition

Post by Secret Alias »

I think Kallistos's position in 1976 was the same as in 1983.

I don't think Tselikas would produce a certificate which contradicted his forgery hypothesis.

I think Smith and Landau would have placed the certificate on pg 1 if it really says what they claim it says rather than buried on p 133 in a murky aside.

It all doesn't add up.
Last edited by Secret Alias on Sun Apr 21, 2024 12:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply