Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Roger Pearse · 07-08-2009, 11:57 AM

Agapius is often referred to by people interested in the so-called "Testimonium Flavianum" of Josephus, or in the fragment of Papias. But the only version of his work to exist in a modern language is the French translation of Alexander Vasiliev; and quite a lot of people don't know French.

Since no-one has produced an English translation in the 95 years since Vasiliev, I have turned his translation into English and made it available online. It is here:

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/in...versal_History

Of course such a thing has no scholarly value, but it ought to encourage some of those who talk about Agapius to look more seriously at his text as a whole, and so bring people into contact with the obscure subject of Arabic Christian literature in a way that would otherwise never happen.

With luck it will also spur some Arabist to undertake the task of producing a real scholarly translation!

The translation is public domain. Do whatever you like with it; there is no copyright on my version. If you can sell copies of it, give them away, post it on your website, I would be honoured.

May I mention that I sell a CDROM of my collection of the Fathers. If you have spare money and would like to support what I do (and help with my photocopying bills), please buy one. It's available from here:

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/al...hers_on_cd.htm

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Back Again · 07-08-2009, 04:49 PM

Thank you for that. What I have read so far is interesting. Have you considered adding a link to the Wikipedia page?

Roger Pearse · 07-09-2009, 01:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Back Again

Thank you for that. What I have read so far is interesting. Have you considered adding a link to the Wikipedia page?

Thanks! I did add a link to the "Agapius the historian" wiki page. Not sure whether any others are appropriate?

PhilosopherJay · 07-09-2009, 06:57 AM

Hi Roger,

Great work, as usual. Thanks.

I am wondering what you make of the fact that Agapius says that the Testimonium was in Wars of the Jews:

Quote:

Josephus the Hebrew spoke of this also in his books which he wrote about the wars of the Jews: "At that time there was a wise man named Jesus, whose life was perfect, his virtues were recognized, and many Jews and Gentiles became his disciples. And Pilate condemned him to death on a cross, and those who had become his disciples, preached his doctrine. They claimed |16 that he appeared to them alive three days after his passion. Maybe he was the Messiah, about whom the prophets had spoken of miracles." This is the story of Josephus and his coreligionists concerning our Lord Christ, may He be glorified.

Whereas, in the demonstratio evangelica(3.5) Theophania (5.43)and in historia (1.11) says it was in the 18th book of Antiquities.

Quote:

7... And there lived at that time Jesus, a wise man, if indeed it be proper to call him a man. For he was a doer of wonderful works, and a teacher of such men as receive the truth in gladness. And he attached to himself many of the Jews, and many also of the Greeks. He was the Christ.

8. When Pilate, on the accusation of our principal men, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him in the beginning did not cease loving him. For he appeared unto them again alive on the third day, the divine prophets having told these and countless other wonderful things concerning him. Moreover, the race of Christians, named after him, continues down to the present day.

The differences in the passages which I have highlighted also appear in need of an explanation.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Agapius is often referred to by people interested in the so-called "Testimonium Flavianum" of Josephus, or in the fragment of Papias. But the only version of his work to exist in a modern language is the French translation of Alexander Vasiliev; and quite a lot of people don't know French.

Since no-one has produced an English translation in the 95 years since Vasiliev, I have turned his translation into English and made it available online. It is here:

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/in...versal_History

Of course such a thing has no scholarly value, but it ought to encourage some of those who talk about Agapius to look more seriously at his text as a whole, and so bring people into contact with the obscure subject of Arabic Christian literature in a way that would otherwise never happen.

With luck it will also spur some Arabist to undertake the task of producing a real scholarly translation!

The translation is public domain. Do whatever you like with it; there is no copyright on my version. If you can sell copies of it, give them away, post it on your website, I would be honoured.

May I mention that I sell a CDROM of my collection of the Fathers. If you have spare money and would like to support what I do (and help with my photocopying bills), please buy one. It's available from here:

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/al...hers_on_cd.htm

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Ben C Smith · 07-09-2009, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

I am wondering what you make of the fact that Agapius says that the Testimonium was in Wars of the Jews:

Quote:

Josephus the Hebrew spoke of this also in his books which he wrote about the wars of the Jews:

Pines has a lengthy footnote on this issue on pages 8-9 of the publication that brought this text to scholarly attention. The basics, as I understand them, are as follows:

The manuscript of Agapius has On the Evil of the Jews.
Most scholars assume that the text is corrupt here, and seek to emend it.
One possible emendation is to turn sharr (evil) into hurub (wars) or harb (war), which Pines says is an easy transformation in the Arabic script.
Another possible emendation is to turn sharr into tadbir (governance), which he says is also an easy transformation.
Agapius elsewhere explicitly states that Josephus wrote twenty books concerning the governance of the Jews, obviously referring to the Antiquities.
Michael the Syrian calls the Antiquities the dubhara (governance), from the same linguistic root as tadbir.

Quote:

The differences in the passages which I have highlighted also appear in need of an explanation.

Truer words were never spoken.

Ben.

Roger Pearse · 07-09-2009, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben C Smith

Pines has a lengthy footnote on this issue on pages 8-9 of the publication that brought this text to scholarly attention. The basics, as I understand them, are as follows:
[*]The manuscript of Agapius has On the Evil of the Jews.[*]Most scholars assume that the text is corrupt here, and seek to emend it.

Sounds reasonable.

Quote:

[*]One possible emendation is to turn sharr (evil) into hurub (wars) or harb (war), which Pines says is an easy transformation in the Arabic script.

SH is a single character, I expect. The vowels won't be written.

Most of the Arabic characters seem to be similar to one another, with the odd dot to distinguish them. It's the most defective script I have ever encountered.

Quote:

[*]Another possible emendation is to turn sharr into tadbir (governance), which he says is also an easy transformation.[*]Agapius elsewhere explicitly states that Josephus wrote twenty books concerning the governance of the Jews, obviously referring to the Antiquities.[*]Michael the Syrian calls the Antiquities the dubhara (governance), from the same linguistic root as tadbir.

Interesting; I must read Pines again.

I went off yesterday and got hold of the CSCO edition which he used. The text as such doesn't contain large chunks from al-Makin; but apparently Cheikho printed extracts from al-Makin, supposedly by Agapius, at the end and I didn't spot that until too late.

I'm dubious about Pines' text. He says that he used al-Makin to 'restore' the text. We all know that texts get longer in transmission anyway, so I have lots of doubts that al-Makin can be used to supplement Agapius anyway.

Back Again · 07-09-2009, 01:28 PM

Hey guys, Agapius goes into a lot of detail about intentional corruption of the LXX by Jewish scholars in order to deny the messiahship of Jesus. He asserts that the same corruption found its way into Syriac texts and that the faithful translations of the LXX were hidden away only to be recovered by Constantine years later.

What textual discrepancies are being addressed with this huge background story? Is it simply a fabrication in order create the impression that Jesus was a threat to first and second century Jews?

the_cave · 07-09-2009, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Back Again

Hey guys, Agapius goes into a lot of detail about intentional corruption of the LXX by Jewish scholars in order to deny the messiahship of Jesus. He asserts that the same corruption found its way into Syriac texts and that the faithful translations of the LXX were hidden away only to be recovered by Constantine years later.

What textual discrepancies are being addressed with this huge background story? Is it simply a fabrication in order create the impression that Jesus was a threat to first and second century Jews?

It appears the Agapius is upset by the fact that the Masoretic text states that the birth ages of the patriarchs (i.e. Adam and his descendants) were 100 years earlier than the LXX says they were.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogies_of_Genesis

I guess Agapius was using the LXX?

PhilosopherJay · 07-09-2009, 08:20 PM

Hi Ben,

Thanks for this. It is quite helpful.

Note that Agapius refers to Josephus five times:

Quote:

1. The length of the ark was three hundred cubits, its width fifty cubits and its height thirty cubits; the ark had three levels. Josephus the Jew, the scholar, who wrote about the destruction of Jerusalem after the Ascension of the Messiah Our Lord, affirms that the planks of the ark were in the town of Afamea

2. Josephus the Hebrew spoke of this also in his books which he wrote about the wars of the Jews:

3. It is said that those who perished in the battles in Jerusalem and died of hunger during the invasion of Vespasian and the siege of that city for 3 years were counted; and the number of dead was about 1,200,000; 110,000 were made prisoners, according to what Josephus says.

4. Josephus the Jew tells in his book on the destruction of Jerusalem that before the ruin of this town, there appeared signs and prodigies, various and extraordinary, which presaged the destruction.

5. When the Romans possessed themselves of Jerusalem, -- Josephus had warned his countrymen before the destruction of Jerusalem and said to them, "Obey the Romans and submit to their emperors and you will praise yourselves for the result of your conduct." -- but they treated him with contempt and insulted him so much that they struck him several times and stoned him. He came to the Romans who, having made him prisoner, obliged him to remain at the court of the emperor. He composed 20 books on the organization of the Jews, their emigration, their High Priests, the wars against the Romans and the siege of Jerusalem. Agrippa wrote 62 letters in which he praised the books of Josephus and the understanding and depth of his knowledge. After his death, the Romans erected a statue of him at Rome in his honour.

This seems to give us a clue as to the correct translation. If we assume that "War of the Jews" is the correct translation, then we have five cases that Agapius refers to or quotes from the work "War of the Jews".

Translating it as "Governance" a reference to Antiquities would create an anomaly.
There would be a switch between reference 2 and reference 3, so that the reader would not know if reference 3 is coming from "Antiquities" or "Wars". Based on this, we can be reasonably certain that Agapius thought that the Testimonium was in Wars.

Also, his reference to 20 books in the fifth reference indicates that he did not know that "Antiquities" itself was a work in 20 books. I think that we have to assume that the translator, Alexander Vasiliev, saw the same term used for "Wars of the Jews" in the fifth Josephus reference and therefore properly did the same translation in the second reference. Otherwise, he would have translated it as "Organization of the Jews" which he mentions in the fifth reference .

I am wondering if it could be a coincidence only that the Slavonic Josephus has the Testimonium in the Jewish Wars and Agapius apparently places it there too.

Apparently there is a Jewish War manuscript which contains the TF. (http://enc.slider.com/Enc/Testimonium_Flavianum). Does anybody know which one it is?

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben C Smith

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

I am wondering what you make of the fact that Agapius says that the Testimonium was in Wars of the Jews:

Pines has a lengthy footnote on this issue on pages 8-9 of the publication that brought this text to scholarly attention. The basics, as I understand them, are as follows:

The manuscript of Agapius has On the Evil of the Jews.
Most scholars assume that the text is corrupt here, and seek to emend it.
One possible emendation is to turn sharr (evil) into hurub (wars) or harb (war), which Pines says is an easy transformation in the Arabic script.
Another possible emendation is to turn sharr into tadbir (governance), which he says is also an easy transformation.
Agapius elsewhere explicitly states that Josephus wrote twenty books concerning the governance of the Jews, obviously referring to the Antiquities.
Michael the Syrian calls the Antiquities the dubhara (governance), from the same linguistic root as tadbir.

Quote:

The differences in the passages which I have highlighted also appear in need of an explanation.

Truer words were never spoken.

Ben.

Roger Pearse · 07-10-2009, 02:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Back Again

Hey guys, Agapius goes into a lot of detail about intentional corruption of the LXX by Jewish scholars in order to deny the messiahship of Jesus. He asserts that the same corruption found its way into Syriac texts and that the faithful translations of the LXX were hidden away only to be recovered by Constantine years later.

Doesn't he just. I got unbelievably tired of translating it again and again.

What he says is that the Syriac Torah was translated from the Hebrew Torah, and not the true Torah of the LXX, and that Annas and Caiaphas did the deed in the time of Christ for nefarious reasons.

I'm not sure that we need spend time on the allegation, but it is interesting that this view was going around in his time.

07-08-2009, 11:57 AM	#1
Roger Pearse Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: N/A Posts: 4,370	English translation of all of Agapius now online Agapius is often referred to by people interested in the so-called "Testimonium Flavianum" of Josephus, or in the fragment of Papias. But the only version of his work to exist in a modern language is the French translation of Alexander Vasiliev; and quite a lot of people don't know French. Since no-one has produced an English translation in the 95 years since Vasiliev, I have turned his translation into English and made it available online. It is here: http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/in...versal_History Of course such a thing has no scholarly value, but it ought to encourage some of those who talk about Agapius to look more seriously at his text as a whole, and so bring people into contact with the obscure subject of Arabic Christian literature in a way that would otherwise never happen. With luck it will also spur some Arabist to undertake the task of producing a real scholarly translation! The translation is public domain. Do whatever you like with it; there is no copyright on my version. If you can sell copies of it, give them away, post it on your website, I would be honoured. May I mention that I sell a CDROM of my collection of the Fathers. If you have spare money and would like to support what I do (and help with my photocopying bills), please buy one. It's available from here: http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/al...hers_on_cd.htm All the best, Roger Pearse

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-08-2009, 04:49 PM	#2
Back Again Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Detroit Metro Posts: 705	Thank you for that. What I have read so far is interesting. Have you considered adding a link to the Wikipedia page?

07-09-2009, 01:28 PM	#7
Back Again Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Detroit Metro Posts: 705	Hey guys, Agapius goes into a lot of detail about intentional corruption of the LXX by Jewish scholars in order to deny the messiahship of Jesus. He asserts that the same corruption found its way into Syriac texts and that the faithful translations of the LXX were hidden away only to be recovered by Constantine years later. What textual discrepancies are being addressed with this huge background story? Is it simply a fabrication in order create the impression that Jesus was a threat to first and second century Jews?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.