Cyril of Alexandria’s Commentary on the Twelve Prophets

Cyril of Alexandria.jpg
Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons

Cyril of Alexandria (d. 444) probably wrote his Commentary on the Twelve Prophets sometime before 428 (ODCC, s.v. “Cyril, St”; Robert C. Hill, trans., Cyril of Alexandria: Commentary on the Twelve, 1:4). The commentary is available in J.-P. Migne’s Patrologia Graeca via Documenta Catholica Omnia:

The two-volume critical edition of Philip Pusey (Clarendon, 1868) is also available via Google Books:

Field’s Edition of Origen’s Hexapla

Since 1875, Frederick Field’s edition of Origen’s Hexapla has been the standard reference for the work. A new edition is in preparation under the auspices of the Hexapla Project. But, for the present, Field’s work remains an invaluable resource. His two-volume edition is available via Internet Archive.

N.B.: The Internet Archive link in the Hexapla Project’s “Editions of the Hexaplaric Fragments” goes only to a page that provides only Field’s first volume, containing Genesis–Esther. The second volume, containing Job–Malachi, is available on a separate page.

Old Latin Editions

A major critical edition of the Old Latin is underway under the auspices of the Vetus Latina Institute. Some volumes have already been released. But, others are still forthcoming.

Meanwhile, the only complete edition of the Old Latin remains that published by Pierre Sabatier (Reims: 1739–1749; see Würthwein, Text of the Old Testament, 147). A later version of this edition, with some volumes reissued in later years, seems to have had three volumes, all of which are available on Internet Archive:

Of course, if there are additional volumes that I have missed, comments identifying those volumes and links to them (if they have been made available online) are most welcome.

Codex Sarravianus Online

Internet Archive has a full-text PDF of Codex Sarravianus, a 5th-century majuscule witness to the Septuagint. The text contains A. W. Sijthoff’s 1897 photographic reproduction of the manuscript.

For reader’s convenience, the bottom of each page indicates the portion of the biblical text covered in that page’s facsimile, with hand-written notes over the facsimiles to indicate the starts of chapters.

The quality of the scan seems to be quite good. Below is an excerpt from Deut 30:2 (on pg. 248) showing the asterisks and metobelus used to mark what seems to be a revision toward the text represented in the MT.

HTS online

HTS issue coverHTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies has its articles openly accessible online. HTS

is an acclaimed Open Access journal with broad coverage that promotes multidisciplinary, religious, and biblical aspects of studies in the international theological arena. The journal’s publication criteria are based on high ethical standards and the rigor of the methodology and conclusions reported.

For more information or to review HTS’s articles, please see the journal’s website.

Logos 7 academic basic

Logos Bible Software logoIn addition to Logos 7 basic, Logos 7 academic basic is available for free. Resources included in the package are sufficient to get one’s feet wet with the principles of how research in and with biblical languages work in Logos—namely:

Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew lexicon
Lexham Bible Dictionary
Septuagint (Lexham English and Swete Greek editions)
Lexham Hebrew Bible
Greek New Testament (SBL)
Lexham Textual Notes
Abbot-Smith Greek Lexicon

For additional information about Logos 7 academic basic, see the LogosTalk blog. To download the package, see the Logos website. For other discussion, see also Logos 7 Basic for free and Trial versions of Biblical Studies software.

Burkett on Aristotle’s “Rhetoric”

John Burkett headshotTexas Christian University’s open, online thesis repository contains John Burkett’s treatment of Book III of Aristotle’s Retoric. The project is a commentary-style work on that book that strives to complete the project that William Grimaldi began with Books I and II. According to the abstract,

This new commentary on Aristotle’s Rhetoric III serves the purpose which the text held at the Classical Lyceum: elucidating Aristotle’s theory of style (lexis) and arrangement (taxis) for scholars, teachers, and practitioners of rhetoric. This commentary provides a much needed update because the last commentary, written by Cambridge classicist E. M. Cope in 1877, is now understood as a misinterpretation that reads Aristotle Platonically, takes seriously only rational appeals, assumes a mimetic theory of language that depreciates style, and misdefines central concepts like the enthymeme and common topics. Providing a new interpretation, this commentary may be summarized by three adjectives: Grimaldian, rhetorical, and accessible. First, this Grimaldian commentary applies the new rhetoric philosophy of William M. A. Grimaldi, S.J., which he explicates in Studies in the Philosophy of Aristotle’s Rhetoric (1972) and in his two-volume Commentary (1980-1988), wherein Grimaldi develops an integrated and contextual interpretation of the Rhetoric. Second, this rhetorical commentary observes the rhetoric in the Rhetoric since Aristotle typically practices what he teaches: writing with enthymemes, defining by metaphor, clarifying by antithesis, and arranging units by thesis, analysis, and synthesis. This commentary observes how Aristotle applies his three rhetorical appeals (êthos, pathos, logos), his theories of propriety (prepon), exotic (xenos), and virtue (aretê) in style, and the systems of Greek imagery, all of which develop a unified and interactive theory of invention, style, and arrangement. Attention is given to Aristotle’s creative theory of metaphor, being a tropos (turn) and a topos (place) of invention, functioning as a stylistic syllogism for creating knowledge with quick, pleasant learning. Arrangement also functions creatively with localized topical procedures for responding to the particular needs of each part of a composition. Third, this accessible commentary features text, translation, comments, and glossary for readers who may not be familiar with Aristotle’s idiom but who have an interest in his rhetorical theory and technical terms. Finally, incorporating recent scholarship, this commentary provides insights from classical rhetoric and new rhetoric, showing their interrelationship and how contemporary research in rhetoric builds on and helps to elucidate Aristotle’s expansive rhetoric as a general theory of language.

For the project’s full text, see TCU’s repository. On a personal note, I had the privilege of working for John while he was working on this project. Discussions with him about some of the more problematic approaches to Aristotle’s Retoric that are noted above proved quite enriching, helpful, and informative, and I’m delighted to see that his project is openly available for interested readers’ consumption.