STUDIA PATRISTICA - Lirias

PEETERSLEUVEN ndash PARIS ndash BRISTOL CT

2017

STUDIA PATRISTICAVOL XCVI

Papers presented at the Seventeenth International Conferenceon Patristic Studies held

in Oxford 2015

Edited byMARKUS VINZENT

Volume 22The Second Half of the Fourth Century

From the Fifth Century Onwards (Greek Writers) Gregory Palamasrsquo Epistula III

Table of Contents

THE SECOND HALF OF THE FOURTH CENTURY

Kelley SpoerlEpiphanius on Jesusrsquo Digestion 3

Young Richard KimNicaea is Not Enough The Second Creed of Epiphaniusrsquo Ancoratus 11

John VoelkerMarius Victorinusrsquo Use of a Gnostic Commentary 21

Tomasz StępieńAction of Will and Generation of the Son in Extant Works of Euno-mius 29

Alberto J Quiroga puertaslsquoIn the Gardens of Adonisrsquo Religious Disputations in Julianrsquos Caesars 37

Ariane MagnyPorphyry and Julian on Christians 47

Jeannette KreijkesThe Impact of Theological Concepts on Calvinrsquos Reception of Chry-sostomrsquos Exegesis of Galatians 421-6 57

Hellen DaytonJohn Chrysostom on katanuxis as the Source of Spiritual Healing 65

Michaela DurstThe Epistle to the Hebrews in the 7th Oration of John Chrysostomrsquos Orationes Adversus Judaeos 71

Paschalis GkortsilasThe Lives of Others Pagan and Christian Role Models in John Chrysostomrsquos Thought 83

Malouine de dieuleveultLrsquoexeacutegegravese de la faute de David (2Regravegnes 11-12) Jean Chrysostome et Theacuteodoret de Cyr 95

VI Table of Contents

Matteo CarusoHagiographic Style of the Vita Spyridonis between Rhetoric and Exegetical Tradition Analogies between John Chrysostomrsquos Homilies and the Work of Theodore of Paphos 103

Paul C BolesMethod and Meaning in Chrysostomrsquos Homily 7 and Origenrsquos Homily 1 on Genesis 111

Susan B GriffithApostolic Authority and the lsquoIncident at Antiochrsquo Chrysostom on Gal 211-4 117

James D CookTherapeutic Preaching The Use of Medical Imagery in the Sermons of John Chrysostom 127

Demetrios BathrellosSola gratia Sola fide Law Grace Faith and Works in John Chrys-ostomrsquos Commentary on Romans 133

Marie-Eve GeigerLes homeacutelies de Jean Chrysostome In principium Actorumthinsp le titre pris comme principe exeacutegeacutetique 147

Pierre AugustinQuelques sources Parisiennes du Chrysostome de Sir Henry Savile 157

Thomas BrauchThe Emperor Theodosius I and the Nicene Faith A Brief History 175

Sergey KimSeverian of Gabala as a Witness to Life at the Imperial Court in Fifth-Century Constantinople 189

FROM THE FIFTH CENTURY ONWARDS (GREEK WRITERS)

Austin Dominic LitkeThe lsquoOrganon Conceptrsquo in the Christology of Cyril of Alexandria 207

Barbara VillaniSome Remarks on the Textual Tradition and the Literary Genre of Cyril of Alexandriarsquos De adoratione et cultu in spiritu et veritate 215

Table of Contents VII

Sandra leuenberger-WengerAll Cyrillians Cyril of Alexandria as Norm of Orthodoxy at the Council of Chalcedon 225

Hans van loonVirtue in Cyril of Alexandriarsquos Festal Letters 237

George KalantzisPassibility Tentability and the Divine Οὐσία in the Debate between Cyril and Nestorius 249

James E GoehringlsquoTalking Backrsquo in Pachomian Hagiography Theodorersquos Catechesis and the Letter of Ammon 257

James F WellingtonLet God Arise The Divine Warrior Motif in Theodoret of Cyrrhusrsquo Commentary on Psalm 67 265

Agnegraves LorrainExeacutegegravese et argumentation scripturaire chez Theacuteodoret de Cyr lrsquoIn Romanos eacutecho des controverses trinitaires et christologiques des IVe et Ve siegravecles 273

Kathryn kleinkopfA Landscape of Bodies Exploring the Role of Ascetics in Theo-doretrsquos Historia Religiosa 283

Maya GoldbergNew Syriac Edition and Translation of Theodore of Mopsuestiarsquos Reconstructed Commentary on Paulrsquos Minor Epistles Fragments Collected from MS (olim) Diyarbakir 22 293

Georgiana HuianThe Spiritual Experience in Diadochus of Photike 301

Eirini A ArtemiThe Comparison of the Triadological Teaching of Isidore of Pelusium with Cyril of Alexandriarsquos Teaching 309

Madalina TocaIsidore of Pelusiumrsquos Letters to Didymus the Blind 325

Michael MuthreichEin aumlthiopisches Fragment der dem Dionysius Areopagita zugeschrie-benen Narratio de vita sua 333

VIII Table of Contents

Istvaacuten PerczelTheodoret of Cyrrhus The Main Source of Pseudo-Dionysiusrsquo Christology 351

Panagiotis G PavlosAptitude (Ἐπιτηδειότης) and the Foundations of Participation in the Philosophy of Dionysius the Areopagite 377

Joost van rossumThe Relationship between Dionysius the Areopagite and Maximus the Confessor Revisiting the Problem 397

Dimitrios A VasilakisDionysius versus Proclus on Undefiled Providence and its Byzantine Echoes in Nicholas of Methone 407

Joseacute Mariacutea nievaThe Mystical Sense of the Aesthetic Experience in Dionysius the Areopagite 419

Ernesto Sergio MainoldiWhy Dionysius the Areopagite The Invention of the First Father 425

Alexandru PrelipceanThe Influence of Romanos the Melodist on the Great Canon of Saint Andrew of Crete Some Remarks about Christological Typologies 441

Alexis TorrancelsquoAssuming our nature corrupted by sinrsquo Revisiting Theodore the Studite on the Humanity of Christ 451

Scott AblesThe Rhetoric of Persuasion in the Polemic of John of Damascus 457

James A FrancisAncient SeeingChristian Seeing The Old and the New in John of Damascus 469

Zachary KeithThe Problem of ἐνυπόστατον in John Damascene Why Is Jesus Not a Human Person 477

Nicholas BamfordBeing Christian Gnosis and Deified Becoming in the lsquoTheoretikonrsquo 485

Table of Contents IX

Alexandros ChouliarasThe Imago Trinitatis in St Symeon the New Theologian and Niketas Stethatos Is this the Basic Source of St Gregory Palamasrsquo own Approach 493

GREGORY PALAMASrsquo EPISTULA III (edited by Katharina Heyden)

Katharina HeydenIntroduction The Two Versions of Palamasrsquo Epistula III to Akindynos 507

Katharina HeydenThe Two Epistulae III of Palamas to Akindynos The Small but Important Difference between Authenticity and Originality 511

Theodoros AlexopoulosThe Problem of the Distinction between Essence and Energies in the Hesychast Controversy Saint Gregory Palamasrsquo Epistula III The Version Published by P Chrestou in Light of Palamasrsquo Other Works on the Divine Energies 521

Renate BurriThe Textual Transmission of Palamasrsquo Epistula III to Akindynos The Case of Monac gr 223 535

Dimitrios MoschosReasons of Being versus Uncreated Energies ndash Neoplatonism and Mathematics as Means of Participating in God according to Nicepho-rus Gregoras 547

Isidore of Pelusiumrsquos Letters to Didymus the Blind

Madalina Toca KU Leuven Belgium

absTracT

Isidore of Pelusium (360-449450) a fifth century Egyptian monk left behind an extensive yet understudied corpus epistularum of approximately 2012 letters transmitted initially in the monastic environment in which he was active This article will discuss the letters preserved as addressed to lsquoDidymusrsquo and will tackle (a) historical issues (addressee date of composition) (b) literary issues (content intent) and (c) exegetical matters in order to establish to what extent we can attribute any of these pieces as addressed to Didymus the Blind and if at all possible to grasp some implications for our understanding of the history of the corpus

Although there is an extensive corpus epistularum1 extant under the name of Isidore of Pelusium only part of it has been critically edited2 and the avail-able secondary literature is rather scarce3 The only available edition of the

1 It is among the largest extant letter-collections from around the same period Libanius ndash with more than 1500 letters Neilos of Ancyra ndash with more than 1000 Basil of Caesarea ndash with approximately 350 letters Gregory of Nazianzus ndash c 250 letters John Chrysostom ndash c 240 letters Synesios of Cyrene ndash with approximately 156 letters See Margaret Mullett lsquoEpistolographyrsquo in E Jeffreys J Haldon R Cormack (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies (Oxford 2008) 882-93 esp 885-6

2 P Eacutevieux edited ep 1214-1700 in two volumes of SC P Eacutevieux Isidore de Peacuteluse Lettres I SC 422 (Paris 1997) and P Eacutevieux Isidore de Peacuteluse Lettres II SC 454 (Paris 2000)

3 The incomplete introduction to the two volumes of Eacutevieux in SC 422 and his 1995 mono-graph (in the series Theacuteologie Historique 99) are among the only extensive modern research publications on this topic With the exception of these a number of general surveys articles or valuable entries in encyclopaedias are also available CH Turner lsquoThe Letters of Saint Isidore of Pelusiumrsquo JTS 6 (1905) 70-86 M Smith lsquoManuscript Tradition of Isidore of Pelusiumrsquo HTR 47 (1954) 205-10 P Eacutevieux lsquoIsidore de Peacuteluse Eacutetat des recherchesrsquo RechScRel 64 (1976) 321-40 U Treu lsquoIsidor II (von Pelusium)rsquo RAC 18 (1998) 982-1002 J Leemans lsquoDie Briefe des Isidor von Pelusium Bildung Glaube Kommunikationrsquo P Gemeinhardt and S Guumlnther (eds) Von Rom nach Bagdad Bildung und Religion in der spaumlteren Antike bis zum klassischen Islam (Tuumlbingen 2013) 29-49 On Isidorersquos life and works see C Fouskas Saint Isidore of Pelusium His Life and His Works (Athens 1970) on his usage of the New Testament C Fouskas Saint Isidore of Pelusium and the New Testament (Athens 1967) on his Christology A Schmid Die Christologie Isidors von Pelusium (Freiburg 1948) Incidentally a number of short articles treating various topics on Isidore have appeared in SP P Eacutevieux lsquoIsidore de Peacuteluse moine

Studia Patristica XCVI 325-332copy Peeters Publishers 2017

326 M Toca

complete corpus is that printed by Migne in Patrologia Graeca 78 Of the 2000 Pierre Eacutevieux prepared about 500 letters (ep 1214-1700) in his new incom-plete critical edition in two Sources Chreacutetiennes volumes

We also know very little of Isidorersquos context He was probably born after 360 in Pelusium the capital of the province Augustamnica Prima and completed his studies in Alexandria at the famous catechetical school Back in Pelusium he became a sophist (around 390-395) and from this position he established a large network of people occupying important places within the political and administrative circles After a short retreat in the Nitrian desert Isidore became a priest in Pelusium but quarrels with the Monophysite bishop Eusebius (around 413) made him join a coenobite monastic community near Pelusium He spent his last 20 years in the monastic milieu and probably the large major-ity of his correspondence dates from this late period He died no later than 449 or 4504

In the following I propose an analysis of the letters addressed to the character lsquoDidymusrsquo This rather small sample comprises 14 letters5 divided as follows (6+1+7) 6 letters sent to the lsquopriest Didymusrsquo (681 682 1249 [v 28] 1448 [v 167] 1515 [iv 20] 1949 [v 534]) 1 letter addressed to both lsquoDidymus and Heronrsquo (1818 [v 433]) and 7 more to lsquoDidymusrsquo without any title attached (199 201 204 205 281 330 331)6 Though small this sample allows one to enquire into the limitations of grouping letters around a certain name in order to identify it with a historically recognizable figure

It is rather common in studies that deal with Isidorersquos letters to assume a connection between Isidore and Didymus the Blind7 In the following I will call this into question This is not to say that Isidorersquos biblical interpretations were not informed by Didymusrsquo exegesis I would however propose that intel-lectual indebtedness and direct communication between the two are rather dif-ferent things With that in mind the only evidence about Isidorersquos possible conversations with Didymus are the 14 letters with this name as an addressee If some of these letters appear to be authentic this fact has implications for the dating of the corpus as well as for its historicity The letters for which the identification of the addressee as Didymus the Blind can be proven may be

eacutegyptien du Ve siegraveclersquo SP 29 (1997) 451-4 Richard Lim lsquoIsidore of Pelusium on Roman Spec-taclesrsquo SP 29 (1997) 66-74 U Treu lsquoIsidore of Pelusium and the Grammaticus Opheliusrsquo SP 32 (1997) 376-9

4 J Leemans lsquoDie Briefe des Isidor von Pelusiumrsquo (2013) esp 30-4 5 Of these only three are incorporated in the new edition of Eacutevieux (1249 [v 28] 1448

[v 167] 1515 [iv 20]) for the rest the text will be that of PG 786 There are also 3 letters to a lsquoDidymus scholasticosrsquo (1492 [v 206] 1493 [v 207] and 1982

[iv 152]) also mentioned in JR Martindale The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire II AD 395-527 (Cambridge 1980) 358 PLRE 2 does not seem to mention the other Didymus (lsquothe priestrsquo) from Isidorersquos letters

7 C Fouskas Saint Isidore of Pelusium (1970) 92-5 This question was also briefly addressed by P Eacutevieux Isidore de Peacuteluse Theacuteologie Historique 99 (Paris 1995) 79-80

Isidore of Pelusiumrsquos Letters to Didymus the Blind 327

indeed among the oldest of the whole Isidorian corpus and thus they would be written before 395 when Didymus died

Overall the letters addressed to the name lsquoDidymusrsquo ndash whomever this char-acter might be ndash present a wide display of concerns exegetical digressions moral advices complains about a Gigantius character in his entourage dog-matic issues and others So is Isidorersquos Didymus Didymus the Blind Are we to speak about only one Didymus I aimed therefore to divide the letters in three categories (a) possible (b) impossible and (c) with virtually no indicators in any direction The indicators I am searching for in evaluating this are the historical accuracy of the content the tone any personal or factual references about the addressee and other topographical or onomastic references which would facilitate the analysis Since the largest group is that of the letters for which there is no indicator in any direction as to whether a letter can be considered addressed to Didymus the Blind or not I will start from them

Letters addressed to lsquoDidymusrsquo (with no title attached)

Ep 1998 addressed to Didymus is an exegetical letter on Matth 1331 com-bined with an allusion to Eph 413(-16) It is a rather short letter of 13 lines in PG 78 so it is worth quoting in full It has no introductory formula and no traces of an on-going conversation ndash formulations such as lsquoas you wrote mersquo lsquoas you enquiredrsquo9 To DidymusAbout the saying ldquothe kingdom of Heaven is like a mustard seedrdquoThe Lord compares the kingdom of Heaven with a mustard seed for many reasons because of the vilification of poverty in His own condescension from which the shadow and the relief from all the pains in life has happened to us because of the smallness of the flock at the beginning of the gospel because of the natural pungency of the seed which also the traveller of the narrow road needs because it cannot be cut in two but it keeps its substance undivided For the one united with God and put together in one complete man has to keep the union with Him indivisible and uncut not separated by any passion but put together entirely with Him10

8 Isidore Ep 199 (PG 78 309-10)9 In PG 78 ep 199 bears the subtitle εἰς τὸ εἰρημένον lt ὀμοία ἐστὶν ἡ βασιλεία τῶν

οὐρανῶν κόκκῳ σινάπεως gt (lsquoAbout the saying ldquothe kingdom of heavens is like a mustard seedrdquorsquo) which shortly describes the subject matter of the letter

10 Διδύμῳ Εἰς τὸ εἰρημένον lt ὁμοία ἐστὶν ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν κόκκῳ σινάπεως gtΚόκκῳ σινάπεως τὴν οὐράνιον βασιλείαν ἀπεικάζει ὁ Κύριος πλείστων ἕνεκα τρόπων

διὰ τὴν εὐτέλειαν τῆς ἐν τῇ οἰκείᾳ συγκαταβάσει πτωχείας ἀφrsquo ἧς ἡμῖν ἡ σκιὰ καὶ ἀνάψυξις ἀπὸ πασῶν τῶν ἐν τῷ βίῳ γέγονεν ὀδυνῶν διὰ τὴν ἐν ἀρχῇ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου τοῦ ποιμνίου σμικρότητα διὰ τὴν ἔμφυτον τοῦ κόκκου δριμύτητα ἧς καὶ χρήζει ὁ τῆς στενῆς ἔμπορος

328 M Toca

This letter develops around the apothegm that lsquothe kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seedrsquo (Matth 1331-2) followed by a number of illustrations of why is that the case all introduced by διά + accusative In this Isidore explains to Didymus that because of Godrsquos goodness and because of the seedrsquos power to germinate the Christian community grew around the gospelrsquos message and became steadfast by being united with God (see Eph 413) Thus whoever united himself with God and became a fully accomplished human (τέλειον ἄνθρωπον) has the duty to preserve that without interruption Thus Isidore starts from a Matthean passage and adds on the way illustrations from another scriptural text (Eph 413) rounding up the first

Thus there is nothing to prove and nothing to disprove the authenticity of the addressee If the criterion for establishing the letterrsquos attribution is that we need some positive evidence then there is none

Ep 20111 revolves around another exegetical question and represents an example of scripture being interpreted through scripture in an allegorical manner In this 6-line letter Isidore questions lsquowhy was the kingdom of heaven like yeastrsquo (Πῶς ὡμοιώθη ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν ζύμῃ) and offers the key for that the image of the incarnation of God Thus through his incarnation Jesus kneaded again the whole world by taking our own humanity and being born through the Virgin Mary Jesus renewed the whole mankind for eternity (ἀπrsquo αἰῶ-νος ἀνθρωπότητα εἰς παλιντοκίαν ἀνακαινισάσῃ)12 Thus within 6 lines Isidore starts from a Matthean passage (Matth 1333) around the metaphor of the kingdom of heaven being like yeast and combines it with the image of Godrsquos incarnation and its implications for the renewal of the world Again the content is altogether too vague and surely without any historical data or personal touch to give one the possibility to establish the identity of the addressee

Ep 204 and 20513 are closely intertwined and basically read as one and the same letter in fact it is difficult to see why they are not actually preserved as one In ep 204 the kingdom of heaven is compared to a net that was thrown into the sea and caught fish of every kind Thus the moral dictum to be taken from here is that despite their appurtenance people should all wish to be caught by the true fishermen (see Matth 1347) However the Matthean passage goes on mentioning that finally the good fish was separated from the bad fish and

ὁδοῦ διὰ τὸ μὴ διακόπτεσθαι ἀλλὰ τὴν ἀδιαίρετον σώζειν ὑπόστασιν Ὁ γὰρ θεῷ ἐνωθείς καὶ εἰς ἕνα τέλειον ἄνθρωπον συναρμολογηθείς ἀδιαίρετον ἔχειν καὶ ἄτμητον τὴν πρὸς αὐτὸν ὀφείλει συνάφειαν οὐδενὶ πάθει χωριζομένην ἀλλrsquo ὅλην αὐτῷ συντεταγμένην (PG 78 Ep 199)

11 Isidore Ep 201 (PG 78 311-2)12 In PG 78 311-2 there is a reference to John 33 lsquobeing born from aboversquo but this is not

necessarily what we have in the Greek text13 Isidore Ep 204-5 (PG 78 311-2 and 313-4)

Isidore of Pelusiumrsquos Letters to Didymus the Blind 329

so will the angels lsquoseparate the evil from the righteousrsquo Therersquos nothing about this in Isidorersquos letter and PG points to a final reference in Matth 419 Ep 205 develops around the same metaphor of the lsquonetrsquo and continues the Matthean biblical sequence introducing the image of the bad and the good fish omitted from the previous letter

Thus read together these two letters are fully rendering the Matthean para-ble Hence only those of good faith (a metaphor for the good fish) will remain in the kingdom of heaven while the heretics (which stand for the bad fish) will be thrown away (Matth 1348) Again these letters are strongly exegetical with no positive evidence that this letter is addressed to Didymus the Blind

Now we move to an example of a non-exegetical letter Ep 28114 is part of the many letters that address Gigantiusrsquo affair Isidore wrote a series of letters trying to prevent Gigantius obtaining further appointments in positions of power after his period as ἄρχων in Pelusium15 In this particular letter Isidore seems to respond to some previous complains of lsquoDidymusrsquo about the deplorable acts of Gigantius

Isidorersquos argument starts with a simplified syllogism (if both Cappadocians and Gibeonites are coming from the Philistines then the Gibeonites are also Cappadocians and they cannot be trusted) Isidore uses this example to illustrate his view that all Cappadocians are ultimately meant to be despised since Gigantius their main exponent is such a detestable example Isidorersquos answer culminates with a list of derogatory qualifications making this letter proverbial for the behaviour he ascribes to Gigantius deceptive (ἀπατηλόν) shameless (ἀναι-δής) bold (θρασύ) coward (δειλόν) mocking things (σκωπτικόν) niggardly (ἀνελεύθερον) treacherous (δόλιον) hating mankind (μισάνθρωπον) despising others (ὑπεροπτικόν) etc16 Thus Isidore voices a strong critique by general-izing his animosity from an individual (Gigantius) to the whole community of the Cappadocians (καὶ οἷον ἔξεις τὸν πάμφαυλον καὶ παμμισῆ Γιγάντιον τοιούτους ἅπαντας καὶ νόμιζε καὶ γίνωσκε Καππαδόκας)

However the Gigantius affair seems to belong to a different time than Didy-mus the Blind A native of Cappadocia Gigantius was a corrector in Augus-tamnica and a governor over Pelusium before 432 when he probably went to Constantinople Didymus the Blind died around 395 Thus this is one of the letters for which the clear anachronism indicates that its attribution to Didymus the Blind is certainly impossible

14 Isidore Ep 281 (PG 78 347-8)15 There are altogether 11 letters which involve in a way or another Gigantius and in three of

them this negative character is mentioned by name as an example of a malicious person with an evil character For more details about the Gigantius affair see P Eacutevieux Isidore de Peacuteluse (1995) 48-56

16 Isidore Ep 281 (PG 78 347-8)

330 M Toca

Ep 330 and 33117 can be again considered as a pair Ep 330 is a quasi-exegetical letter around Ps 13815 [LXX] ndash lsquomy bone was not hidden from you when I was made in secretrsquo underlying Godrsquos knowing power this passage is subsequently combined with a Genesis reference (Gen 221-2) dwelling around the same image of the lsquobonersquo Thus therersquos nothing hidden from God neither Adamrsquos regret nor Eversquos slipperiness However in addition to the biblical passage Isidore introduces the notion of ὄλισθος (the womanrsquos slip-periness) which did not escape (ἔλαθε) Godrsquos notice Rather interesting Isidore does not launch in any interpretation of the two passages meant rather to impress by accumulation and not necessarily taken as a starting point for an exegetical demarche

Letter 331 is the first letter which preserves something of a personal dimen-sion of a letter The character Didymus to whom this letter addresses is referred to as ἀγχίνοος ὤν (being sagacious) and συνετῶς ἐρευνῶν (searching with intelligence) and somehow with reverence Πάντα γὰρ καλῶς ἀθροίσας ἐν νεότητι ἔχεις ἐν γήρει ἀνάπαυσιν Having gathered everything rightly in your youth you have rest in your old age

The content of this letter develops around the Psalm passage 13816 (LXX Your eyes have seen my unformed substance) which is also the subtitle of the letter in PG 7818 Thus all there is to men God knows beforehand and entirely also those that are still to be born or things that are still to happen (in the future) According to Isidore this may be also interpreted as follows the good sincere deeds are also known to God who keeps record of them in his memory where there is no place for forgetting19 There is nothing is this letter to exclude that Didymus is the famous Alexandrian exegete but there is also nothing more to guide us into arguing for this except of the few indicators regarding the addresseersquos persona (his intelligence and sagacity)

Letters addressed to lsquoDidymus the priestrsquo

In ep 681 and 68220 Didymus seems rather a disciple of Isidore They are both very short (5 and respectively 7 lines) with no introductory formulas and deal with the same subject The first one is a short scolding about some deeds that this priest might have done against some friends and in the second letter Isidore offers him an opportunity to explain himself The tone is certainly that of a teacher-disciple superior-novice relationship in which Isidore is the one

17 Isidore Ep 330-1 (PG 78 371-2 and 373-4)18 Τὶ ἐστι lsquoΤὸ ἀκατέργαστόν μου εἶδον οἱ ὀφθαλμοί σουrsquo Isidore Ep 331 (PG 78 373-4)19 Adam is metonymically used to refer to David (the psalmist)20 Isidore Ep 681-2 (PG 78 633-4)

Isidore of Pelusiumrsquos Letters to Didymus the Blind 331

who offers advices investigates when something goes wrong and seems to look after Didymus

But maybe more interesting is ep 1249 [v 28] a rather long letter covering two full columns and a quarter in Migne (107 lines)21 It reads as a collection of answers on different issues which seem to have been enquired by the priest lsquoDidymusrsquo In Migne it has the subtitle lsquoFratrem eius laudat Ad quinque capita per epistolam quaesita respondetrsquo Shortly ep 1249 consists of

(1) A laudatory passage on the priest Aphrodisios (Ἀφροδισίῳ) and those who adhere to a virtuous life Aphrodisios is referred to as Didymusrsquo brother (σῷ ἀδελφῷ) and probably a priest in the region of Pelusium22 (2) a general critique on those who pretend being virtuous in a language reminiscent of Ter-tullian (3) a more specific critique on the evil deeds of (probably) Gigantios Parts (2) and (3) are somehow to be read adjacently Isidore instructs his addressee about the usefulness of living a virtuous life and also about the harshness of keeping it especially in such a corrupting milieu as Pelusium became and continues with a more specific (counter-) example offered by Gigantius He is not mentioned by name in this letter but referred to as lsquothe devil onersquo23

(4) Then follows a passage meant to clarify dogmatic issues on the Sonship of Christ (lines 51-63) and (5) it continues on more Hellenistic terms as it seems that the competition between the Christians and the pagans was not uncommon by that time Though it starts by acknowledging the positive aspects of the Greek politeia it nevertheless gets to the point of asserting the superior-ity of the Christian tradition and the Christian ideal thought by the very divine Logos (θειότατος Λόγος) (6) The letter ends with the moral advice of achiev-ing harmony between what you say and what you do In view of both the tone of the letter which seems too didactic (both in structure and content) to be addressed to the old Didymus and the reference to Gigantius we can almost certainly ascribe this letter to a date around 420-430 and thus considerably posterior to Didymusrsquo death

In ep 1448 [v 167] written to lsquothe priest Didymusrsquo Isidore calls his addressee σοφώτατε (lsquovery wisersquo)24 and in ep 1515 [iv 20] Isidore picks up on topics he dealt with in letter 1249 (leading a virtuous life and avoiding the vices)25 Though σοφώτατε may indeed testify to Isidorersquos consideration towards Didymus the tone of these letters suggests that the priest Didymus is

21 For the Greek text P Eacutevieux Isidore de Peacuteluse Lettres I SC 422 232-322 Ep 1249 1-3 SC 422 232 Ἀφροδισίῳ τῷ μακαρίῳ τῷ σῷ μὲν ἀδελφῷ πρεσβυτέρῳ

δὲ τὴν ἀξίαν αἰδὼς μὲν ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς κατῴκει πειθὼ δὲ ἐν χείλεσι σοφία δὲ ἐπὶ γλώττης23 Ep 1249 32-4 SC 422 236 hellip φημὶ οὐδὲν ἕτερον ἀλλrsquo ἀρετὴν ἀσκητέον καὶ ἡσυχα-

στέον καὶ τὴν κρίσιν προσδοκητέον καὶ τὰς διαβολικὰς μεθόδους διακρουστέον24 Isidore Ep 1448 SC 454 78-925 Isidore Ep 1515 SC 454 192-3

332 M Toca

more of a disciple of Isidore than an older perhaps more experienced col-league26

For clarity the letters can be grouped as follows in table format

Possible (positive evidenceindicators) 331

With virtually no indicators in any direction 199 201 204-205 330 1515 [iv 20] 1448 [v 167]

Impossible (anachronisms tone etc) 281681-682 1249 [v 28] 1818 [v 433]1449 [v 534]

To conclude as the analysis shows there are virtually no positive indicators to plead for the identification of Isidorersquos Didymus with Didymus the Blind The notion of σοφώτατε some specifications about Didymusrsquo old age and to his wisdom and intelligence are the most one can find as lsquopositiversquo evidence for this attribution Also some of the letters have a strong local character (ep 281 1249 1818) displaying the strive of the Pelusian community and thus foreign from being linked to Didymus the Blind Furthermore the tone and the style of some letters are equally fair indicators of doubt or exclusion (for instance letters 681-682 set forth a visible uneven relationship between Isidore and lsquothe priest Didymusrsquo) This may look as a too negative sort of result but it helps one step on safer ground Finally this has implications not only for this very sample but also for the dating of Isidorersquos corpus the dating of the earliest letters based on the identification of Didymus as the addressee has a very weak perhaps negligible basis

26 Ep 1818 [v 433] (Heron seems to be a victim of the malfunctions in Pelusium) and 1949 [v 534] seem to fall into the same category See PG 78 1579-80 and 1627-8