Jonathan Loopstra, The Patristic “Masora”: A
Study of Patristic Collections in Syriac Handbooks from the Near East
Yury
Arzhanov
Austrian Academy of Sciences
Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute
George A. Kiraz
James E. Walters
TEI XML encoding by
James E. Walters
Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute
2021
Volume 24.2
For this publication, a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
license has been granted by the author(s), who retain full
copyright.
https://hugoye.bethmardutho.org/article/hv24n2prarzhanov1
Yury Arzhanov
Jonathan Loopstra, The Patristic “Masora”: A
Study of Patristic Collections in Syriac Handbooks from the Near East
https://hugoye.bethmardutho.org/pdf/vol24/HV24N2PRArzhanov1.pdf
Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies
Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute, 2021
vol 24
issue 2
pp 541-544
Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies is an electronic journal dedicated to the study
of the Syriac tradition, published semi-annually (in January and July) by Beth
Mardutho: The Syriac Institute. Published since 1998, Hugoye seeks to offer the
best scholarship available in the field of Syriac studies.
File created by James E. Walters
Jonathan Loopstra, The Patristic “Masora”: A
Study of Patristic Collections in Syriac Handbooks from the Near East, CSCO
689 / Syr. 265 (Louvain: Peeters, 2020). Pp. xxiv + 449, illustrations; €125.00.
The expression “Syriac Masora” refers to manuscripts
containing vocalized excerpts from biblical and patristic works, which constituted
the core of the Syriac educational system in the early medieval periods. This term
was coined in the late nineteenth century by W. Wright and J. Martin as an analogy
to the work of the famous Masoretes, who standardized the proper reading of the
Hebrew Bible. Despite some attempts to apply other expressions, based on the genuine
Syriac tradition (e.g., the “Qarqapta tradition” or “shmahe manuscripts”), the term “Masora” gained general
acceptance, although the fact that this term appears in the quotation marks in
Loopstra’s book suggests that it still needs justification.
The present book continues a series of publications by Jonathan
Loopstra, which started with his PhD thesis, defended in 2009. The thesis included a
facsimile publication and an annotated transcription of the part of manuscript Vat.
Sir. 152 containing the “names and readings” extracted from patristic writings. In
2015, Loopstra prepared a facsimile edition and transcription of the only known East
Syriac “masoretic” manuscript, BL Add. 12,138, which contains the biblical “Masora”.
In his latest book, the author states that he is planning both further editions of
the masoretic manuscripts and systematic studies of the history of the Syriac
Masora.
With these publications, Loopstra provides modern scholars with
invaluable sources for the history of the Syriac language and the Christian
educational system. Syriac masoretic manuscripts open a window into the reading and
writing practices of Syriac scribes in the tenth and eleventh centuries, which may
greatly contribute to modern studies of Syriac grammar, phonology, and
transcription. The Syriac Masora is also an important source for the history of the
interaction between Greek and Syriac languages, as most of the “names and readings”
that appear in the masoretic collections derive from Syriac translations from the
Greek. More than that, each masoretic collection turns out to be a concentrated
library, which on several folios may contain information about texts occupying whole
codices.
The book under review provides a further witness to the
tradition of the Syriac Masora. It contains two parts. The first one is an
introduction to the patristic Masora, and its historical and educational context.
The second part presents the patristic Masora preserved in manuscript Damascus Syr.
7/16 (dated 1004 c.e.) and an analysis of its Greek
sources. It includes a careful transcription of each excerpt (with vocalization) and
locates it in a Syriac manuscript that contains the full version of the excerpted
treatise, and identifies the underlying Greek text by means of references to the PG.
This part will certainly prove to be an invaluable tool for modern editors of the
works of, e.g., Basil the Great and Gregory of Nazianzus.
In the first, introductory part of his book, Loopstra outlines
the main characteristics of the patristic Masora and attempts to reconstruct its
instructional function. Here, the author refrains from drawing clear conclusions.
Rather, he suggests various explanations of the possible Sitz im
Leben of the masoretic collections.
The collections of the patristic Masora appear later than the
biblical masoretic manuscripts (which include also the East Syriac manuscript BL
Add. 12,138). All extant manuscripts containing the patristic Masora are of the West
Syriac origin. Most of them were composed between 980 and the late eleventh century
in the region of Melitene (some are connected with the regions of Nineveh and
Tikrit). However, they reflect a long pedagogical tradition, which probably began in
the seventh century and fade in the thirteenth. They contain translations that
derive from the scholars of the famous monastery of Qenneshre and thus reflect the
West Syriac educational background.
The patristic Masora includes the works of Ps.-Dionysius the
Areopagite, Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Severus of Antioch. Some
additional treatises appear in various manuscripts as appendices. Chapter 5 of the
book outlines the content of one such appendix, in manuscript Damascus Syr. 12/22,
containing excerpts from the works of Ephrem the Syrian, Isaac of Antioch, and Jacob
of Serugh. This appendix demonstrates how the texts of the classical Syriac writers
were read in the period of the late Syriac Renaissance. However, most of the
masoretic collections contain a standard set of sample texts, though they may differ
in some details. For example, sometimes the masoretic manuscripts contain multiple
variants of the same words, thus serving as a sort of a critical apparatus to the
texts.
The differences between various manuscripts are significant
enough to consider them as individual collections. Loopstra pays attention to the
common scribal errors found in different manuscripts, which suggests that their
compilers made use of the earlier lists or collections of “difficult words and
readings.” However, Loopstra reaches the conclusion that no original collection or
“master” manuscript may be reconstructed by way of textual criticism.
The order of words excerpted in the masoretic manuscripts
follows that of the full text of the treatises. Thus, the masoretic manuscripts were
most likely used together with the full texts of the patristic works and were
intended to provide help for the correct vocalization, and in some cases for a
better understanding of these works. Thus, their readers not only needed to have
both manuscripts in front of them, but also required teachers who would instruct
them. There is some evidence that the excerpts included in the masoretic collections
were used in grammatical training, for the same passages appear in treatises on
grammar. The patristic Masora includes also elements that derive from glosses and
marginal notes in the non-masoretic manuscripts. Moreover, the masoretic manuscripts
contain their own glosses and scholia, scribbled in the margins, which reflect an
ongoing teaching practice that included both the proper vocalization and
pronunciation of particular elements, and their interpretation.
Each part of the book would have been worthwhile to have been
published separately. The amount of materials packed in the whole volume is immense,
and the book is destined to serve as a reference tool for scholars working with
different patristic texts. It would therefore have been very helpful if the volume
had included indexes, to facilitate navigation and a quick search. Although the
second part contains a useful index of Greek, Hebrew, and Latin words that appear in
the patristic Masora in manuscript Damascus Syr. 7/16, neither a subject index nor
an index of references for the introductory part has been included. Instead, a list
of Syriac manuscripts to which the author refers in the introductory part is
included into the bibliography, but this does not provide help for searching the
first part of the book. Nonetheless, it is certainly worth reading this book from
beginning to end in order to gain insight into the Syriac intellectual and
pedagogical life during one of the most exciting and productive epochs of Syriac
culture, the period around the turn to the second millennium c.e.