patristics | manuscripts



The outcome of the Hexapla among the papyri?

Here’s an interesting article for those interested in Patristics and papyrology: Francesca Schironi, “P.Grenf. 1.5, Origen, and the Scriptorium of Caesarea,” Bulletin of the American Society of Papyrologists 52 (2015): 181-223. The abstract goes as follows:

P.Grenf. 1.5, a fragment from a papyrus codex with Ezekiel 5:12-6:3, is here put in its historical context. Since it was written close to Origen’s own lifetime (185-254 CE), it provides early evidence about how he used critical signs in his editions of the Old Testament. It also sheds light on the work of the scriptorium of Caesarea half a century later.”

Quite interestingly, Francesca Schironi argues that inasmuch as the by-product of Origen’s Hexapla was a stand-alone edition of the LXX ‘enriched’ with Hebrew readings (in which the textual differences were marked with text-critical signs, using obelos to mark what is present in the LXX and not in the HT, and asteriskos to mark what is absent in the LXX but present in the HT), then P.Grenf. 1.5., which contains a fragment of Ezekiel and displays such critical sigla, may well just be a very early remnant of this by-product (or rather end-product?) of the Hexapla, and quite close to Origen’s time.

This is an extensive, well researched interesting article. Other articles on critical signs in the papyri (and a host of other topics) can be found on the author’s academia edu page, here.


The latest on the latest Origen homiletic trove

Lorenzo Perrone has uploaded on a forthcoming piece of his on Origen’s ‘new’ homilies on Psalms found in Codex Monacensis Gr. 314 (published last year, see here), specifically on the exegesis of Psalm 76: “Scrittura e cosmo nelle nuove omelie di Origene sui Salmi: l’interpretazione del Salmo 76,” Acta Antiqua, forthcoming.

On the same platform, L. Perrone has usefully uploaded a dossier of his publications on these homilies, here.

ZAC article on Origen’s exegesis in Latin

The latest ZAC/JAC issue features an article on the Latin version of Origen’s Commentary on Canticum Canticorum, and on the peculiarities of Rufinus’ translation of it: Vito Limone, “I nomi dell’amore: Un’indagine sulla traduzione latina del Commento al Cantico dei Cantici di Origene,” ZAC/JAC 19/3 (2015) 407-28. The author first presents Origen’s exegesis of Canticum Canticorumthen analyzes Rufinus’ choice of words in his translation along by comparison with 10 surviving Greek fragments.

Thus goes the abstract: “The aim of this paper is to compare the Greek fragments of Origen’s Commentary on the Song of Songs and the Latin translation by Rufinus. In particular, in Commentarius in Canticum Canticorum, prol. 2,20 the Latin text lists four names of the love: amor and cupido with regard to the physical love, and dilectio and caritas with regard to the spiritual love. In Greek fragments there are only “agape” with regard to the spiritual love and “eros” with regard to the physical love. Then, this paper aims to compare the Greek language through which Origen expresses the love in the fragments with the Latin language in which Rufinus translates Origen’s original text, so Rufinus seems to have complicated the original Greek text of Origen. Moreover, the paper lists also other important words through which Origen expresses the love in the fragments, i.e. philia and philanthropia.”

Create a free website or blog at

Up ↑