John of Damascus: More Than a

Compiler Scott Ables

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/john-of-damascus-more-than-a-compiler-scott-ables/
John of Damascus
 Texts and Studies
in Eastern Christianity

Chief Editor

Ken Parry (Macquarie University)

Editorial Board

Alessandro Bausi (University of Hamburg) – Monica Blanchard

(Catholic University of America) – Malcolm Choat (Macquarie University)
Peter Galadza (Saint Paul University) – Victor Ghica (mf Norwegian School
of Theology, Religion and Society) – Emma Loosley (University of Exeter)
Basil Lourié (St Petersburg) – John McGuckin (Columbia
University) – Stephen Rapp (Sam Houston State University)
Dietmar W. Winkler (University of Salzburg)

volume 26

Texts and Studies in Eastern Christianity is intended to advance the field of Eastern Christian
Studies by publishing translations of ancient texts, individual monographs, thematic collections,
and translations into English of significant volumes in modern languages. It will cover the
Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Catholic traditions from the early through
to the contemporary period. The series will make a valuable contribution to the study of Eastern
Christianity by publishing research by scholars from a variety of disciplines and backgrounds.
The different traditions that make up the world of Eastern Christianity have not always received
the attention they deserve, so this series will provide a platform for deepening our knowledge of
them as well as bringing them to a wider audience. The need for such a series has been felt for
sometime by the scholarly community in view of the increasing interest in the Christian East.

The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/tsec

John of Damascus
More Than a Compiler

Edited by

Scott Ables

leiden | boston
The Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available online at https://catalog.loc.gov
lc record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2022050940

Typeface for the Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic scripts: “Brill”. See and download: brill.com/brill‑typeface.

issn 2213-0039
isbn 978-90-04-52642-6 (hardback)
isbn 978-90-04-52686-0 (e-book)

Copyright 2023 by Scott Ables. Published by Koninklijke Brill nv, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Koninklijke Brill nv incorporates the imprints Brill, Brill Nijhoff, Brill Hotei, Brill Schöningh, Brill Fink,
Brill mentis, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Böhlau, V&R unipress and Wageningen Academic.
Koninklijke Brill nv reserves the right to protect this publication against unauthorized use. Requests for
re-use and/or translations must be addressed to Koninklijke Brill nv via brill.com or copyright.com.

This book is printed on acid-free paper and produced in a sustainable manner.

Contents

Preface vii
List of Maps and Figures viii
Abbreviations ix
Notes on Contributors xii
Maps xv

Introduction 1
Scott Ables

part 1
The Damascene’s Sources, Life, & Context

1 The Greek Lives of St John Damascene: Common Information,

Differences, and Historical Value 17
Robert Volk

2 New Evidence for the Source of the Arabic Life of John Damascene
and the Arabic Translation of the Expositio fidei 40
Habib Ibrahim

3 The Purpose of the Anti-Manichaean Polemic of John of Damascus 65

Scott Ables

4 ‘Ὡς θεῖος ἔφη Διονύσιος’—John Damascene’s Reception and

Interpretation of the Corpus Areopagiticum 86
Vassilis Adrahtas

5 The Ordering of Knowing and the Acquisition of Knowledge

in the Expositio fidei 106
Peter Schadler

6 ‘Supposedly Encountered an Arian Monk’: John of Damascus

on the Origin of Islam 116
Najib George Awad
vi contents

7 Theology for the Public: Aspects of John of Damascus’ Theological

Discourse in His Homilies 133
Petros Tsagkaropoulos

part 2
The Damascene’s Theological Vision

8 The Understanding of the Sacraments in John of Damascus’

Theology 153
Vassa Kontouma

9 Imago Dei: The Functionality of the Divine Image in John

of Damascus 172
Brenda Mariana Méndez-Gallardo

10 The Concept of Matter in St John Damascene’s Anti-Manichaean

Theology of Creation 189
Theocharis S. Papavissarion

11 Philosophy as Both an Instrument and a Structural Principle

of Theological Discourse in John Damascene 208
Anna Zhyrkova

12 John of Damascus’ View of Universals and Particulars in Light

of the Christological Debate 223
Johannes Zachhuber

13 The Historicity of Personal Being: A Dialogue in Absentia between John

Damascene and Martin Heidegger 240
Smilen Markov

Appendix: Expositio et declaratio fidei cpg 8078: Introduction

and English Translation 255
Habib Ibrahim
Index of Modern Authors 272
Index of Names and Subjects 275
Index of Ancient Sources 278
Preface

In 2009 I contacted Vassa Kontouma after reading her 1995 article on Ps. Cyril
of Alexandria.1 Leonard Prestige had argued that Ps. Cyril was the 6th century
theologian who migrated the Christological term perichōrēsis into Trinitarian
thought, which was subsequently adopted by John of Damascus.2 However,
Kontouma argued that Ps. Cyril was not a source of John but a compilation of
John, so it was John himself who was responsible for Trinitarian perichōrēsis.3 I
met Kontouma in Paris (2010) and Oxford (2015) to discuss John. Aware of her
interest in nurturing a growing network of scholars on John, despite her long
habit of summering in Greece, in 2018 I persuaded her to participate in a work-
shop on John the following summer. Kontouma won key financial support from
Labex resmed (Religions and Societies of the Mediterranean World). Zachary
Keith, whom I met through Sidney Griffith while at Dumbarton Oaks in spring
2015, agreed to help as well. With their help the John of Damascus: More than
a Compiler workshop met at the xviii International Conference of Patristic
Studies, Oxford, 20–21 August 2019. It only remains for me to thank Ken Parry
and members of the editorial board of Brill’s Texts and Studies in Eastern Chris-
tianity for accepting this volume in the series.

Scott Ables
Portland, Oregon, USA

1 Vassa Conticello (1995) ‘Pseudo-Cyril’s De ss. Trinitate: A Compilation of Joseph the Philoso-
pher’, Orientalia Christiana Periodica 61: 117–129. Republished in Vassa Kontouma (2015): John
of Damascus: New Studies on his Life and Works (Farnham, Surrey/Burlington, VT: Ashgate).
2 G.L. Prestige (1964) God in Patristic Thought (2nd edn.; London: spck): 284, 291, 294–299.
3 Conticello (1995): 125. See also Andrew Louth’s assessment of Kontouma’s analysis, ‘her argu-
ments seem to me absolutely compelling’ in Andrew Louth (2002) St. John Damascene: Tra-
dition and Originality in Byzantine Theology (Oxford: oup), 87.
Maps, Figures, and Tables

Maps

1 Near East after the Islamic Conquest (L) xvi

2 Near East after the Islamic Conquest (R) xvii
3 Northern Syria, Cilicia, and Cyprus xviii
4 Lebanon and southern Syria xviii
5 Egypt and Palestine xix
6 Locations of Manichaean Sites, Texts, or Polemicists 70

Figures

1 Terminology: General correspondances in chs. 81–86 (English) 159

2 Terminology: General correspondances in chs. 81–86 (Greek) 159
3 Adoption as presented in ch. 81 160
4 Adoption by grace according to ch. 82 161
5 Complements brought by ch. 83 162
6 Cross as praxis and logos according to chs. 82 and 83 164
7 Mysteria according to ch. 86 166

Tables

1 Significant Manichaean Dates 66

2 Christian Anti-Manichaean Polemic 68
3 The development of the modes of reception of the ca by the Damascene 102
Abbreviations

Works of John of Damascus

John of Damascus, eds. Bonifatius Kotter, Robert. Volk, et al., Die Schriften des
Johannes von Damaskos, 8 Vols. (pts 7; 12; 17; 22; 29; 60–66/1; 68; 74–78; Berlin:
De Gruyter, 7:1969, 12:1973, 17:1975, 22:1981, 29:1988, 60(6/1):2006, 61(6/1):2009,
68:2013, 74–77:2018, 78:2019).

Aceph. De natura composita contra acephalos. On the Composite Nature, Against

the Acephali (cpg 8051): Kotter iv [pts 22], 409–417.
Barlaam Historia animae utilis de Barlaam et Ioasaph. The Story of the Practical
Life of Barlaam and Joseph (cpg 8120): Volk vi i/ii [pts 60–61], ii:1–406.
Barb. Laudatio s. Barbarae. Praise of St Barbara (cpg 8065): Kotter v [pts 29],
256–278.
Chrys. Laudatio s. Johannis Chrysostomi (cpg 8064): Kotter v [pts 29], 359–370.
Dial. Capita philosophica (Dialectica). (cpg 8041): Kotter i [pts 7], 47–146.
Dorm. i–iii In dormitionem orationes tres (cpg 8061–8063): Kotter v [pts 29], 483–
500, 516–540, 548–555.
Expos. Expositio fidei. On the Orthodox Faith (cpg 8043): Kotter ii [pts 12], 7–239.
Ficus Homilia in ficum arefactam. Homily on the Fig-Tree (cpg 8058): Kotter v
[pts 29], 102–110.
Fides De fide contra Nestorianos. On the Faith, Against the Nestorians
(cpg 8054): Kotter iv [pts 22], 238–253.
Haeres. Liber de haeresibus. On Heresies (cpg 8044): Kotter iv [pts 22], 19–67.
Hypap. Sermo in hypapanten Domini. Homily on the Meeting of the Lord
(cpg 8066): Kotter v [pts 29], 381–395.
Ieiun. De sacris ieiuniis. On the Holy Fasts (cpg 8050): pg 95, col. 64–77.
Imag. i–iii Contra imaginum calumniatores orationes tres. Three Treatises Against
Those Who Attack the Icons (cpg 8045): Kotter iii [pts 17], 65–200. [aka
On Images, thus the abbr. Imag.]
Instit. Institutio elementaris. Elementary Introduction (cpg 8040): Kotter i
[pts 7], 19–26.
Jacob. Contra Jacobitas. Against the Jacobites (cpg 8047): Kotter iv [pts 22], 109–
153.
Manich. Contra Manichaeos. Against the Manichaeans=Dialog against the Mani-
chaeans (cpg 8048): Kotter iv [pts 22], 351–398.
Nestor. Adversos Nestorianos. Against the Nestorians (cpg 8053): Kotter iv
[pts 22], 263–288.
x abbreviations

Parall. 4–5 Sacra (spuria) (cpg 8056): Tobias Thum and José Declerck viii/4–8
[pts 74–78]. Parall. or Hiera See also, Sacra parallela. Hiera. (cpg 8056):
pg 95, col. 1040–588, 96 col. 9–442.
Paul Commentarii in epistulas Pauli. Commentary on the Epistles of Paul
(cpg 8079): Volk vii [pts 68], 21–538.
Rect. De recta sententia liber. On Right Thinking (cpg 8046): pg 94, 1421–1432.
[nb: Kotter abbreviates Sentent.]
Sabbat. Homilia in sabbatum sanctum. Homily for Holy Saturday (cpg 8059): Kot-
ter v [pts 29], 121–146.
Sarac. Disputatio Saraceni et Christiani. Dispute between a Saracen and a Chris-
tian (cpg 8075): Kotter iv [pts 22], 427–438.
Transfig. Homilia in transfigurationem domini. Homily on the Transfiguration of the
Lord (cpg 8057): Kotter v [pts 29], 436–459.
Trisag. Epistula de hymno Trisagio. Letter on the Trisagion Hymn (cpg 8049): Kot-
ter iv [pts 22], 304–332.
Volunt. De duabus in Christo voluntatibus. On the Two Wills in Christ (cpg 8052):
Kotter iv [pts 22], 173–231.

Other Abbreviations

aw Athanasius Werke
bhg Bibliotheca hagiographica graeca, 3rd ed., 3 vols., ed. François Halkin, Sub-
sidia Hagiographica 8a (Brussels: 1957)
bz Byzantinische Zeitschrift (Munich/Leipzig, 1892–)
ccsg Corpus christianorum series graeca
cpg Clavis patrum graecorum, 7 Vols. (Turnhout: Brepols, 1974–2010)
csco Corpus scriptorum christianorum orientalium
cshb Corpus scriptorum historiae byzantinae (Bonn, 1828–1897)
gcs Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten [drei] Jahrhunderte
gno Gregorii Nysseni opera
jecs Journal of Early Christian Studies
jts Journal of Theological Studies
Lampe Lampe, G.W. H., Patristic Greek Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995).
msr Mélanges de science réligieuse
gcs nf Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten drei Jahrhunderte,
publ. Berlin—Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Berlin.
Neue Folge 1 (1995)
ocp Orientalia christiana periodica
oup Oxford University Press
abbreviations xi

pg Patrologia graeca. Ed. Jacques-Paul Migne. 162 vols. (Paris: 1857–1866).

pl Patrologia latina. Ed. Jacques-Paul Migne. 217 vols. (Paris: 1844–1864).
pmbz Prosopographie der mittelbyzantinischen Zeit, Abt. 1 (641–867), 6 vols. (de
Gruyter: Berlin, 1999–2002)
pts Patristiche Texte und Studien
sc Sources chrétiennes
spb Studia patristica et byzantina (Etall: Buch-Kunstverlag)
StP Studia patristica
tu Teste und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur
tlg Thesaurus linguae graecae: A Digital Library of Greek Literature
VigChr Vigiliae christianae
ZKg Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte
Notes on Contributors

Scott Ables
Lecturer, Oregon State University, DPhil (2016, Oxford, ‘The Purpose of Peri-
chōrēsis in the Polemical Works of John of Damascus’). He researches the his-
tory of Christological controversy in Late Antiquity but has interests in post-
modern constructive theology as well.

Vassilis Adrahtas
University of Western Sydney, Australia, teaches Islamic Studies. His special-
ization and research include Early Christianity, Patristics, Byzantine Philoso-
phy, Ancient Greek Religion, and Indigenous Australian Religions. His involve-
ment with the study of John Damascene goes back to his MPhil thesis ‘The
Use of Logic in the Work of John Damascene: Approaches to Fons Scientiae’
(2001).

Najib George Awad

Professor of Christian theology and Eastern Christian thought, Hartford Sem-
inary, ct usa. His research interests include Arabic Christianity, Christian-
Muslim relations, comparative, interreligious and contextual theologies, and
the Contemporary Middle East. He publishes in both Arabic and English, in-
cluding Umayyad Christianity: John of Damascus as a contextual example of
identity formation in Early Islam (2018); and After-Mission, Beyond Evangeli-
calism: The Indigenous ‘Injīliyyūn’ in the Arab-Muslim Context of Syria-Lebanon
(2020).

Habib Ibrahim
PhD (2016, ephe-Paris, ‘Jean Damascène arabe: édition critique des deux traités
Contre les Nestoriens’). He is a research associate at the University St Joseph—
Beirut and Assistant Professor at Lebanese University. He wrote his thesis on
John of Damascus’ two treatises against the Nestorians. He works on different
projects connected to the study of Christian Arabic literature.

Vassa Kontouma
Dean, Religious Studies, École Pratique des Hautes Études, psl, Paris, France,
and Présidente de l’Institut français d’Études byzantines. PhD (1996, Paris-4
Sorbonne) thesis: ‘La “Source de connaissance” de S. Jean Damascène: traduc-
tion annotée des livres i (Dialectica) et iii (Expositio de fide orthodoxa).’ She
researches John of Damascus, Byzantine and Post-Byzantine theology, Ortho-
notes on contributors xiii

dox dogmatic, Post-Byzantine manuscripts, Dositheus ii of Jerusalem, and the

Greek Diaspora in Ottoman times.

Smilen Markov
Assistant Professor in Christian Philosophy, University of Veliko Turnovo, Bul-
garia. PhD (University of Cologne, 2010), thesis: ‘The Metaphysical Synthesis
of John Damascene: historical interconnections and structural transforma-
tions’, published as Die metaphysische Synthese des Johannes von Damaskus:
Historische Zusammenhänge und Strukturtransformationen, Brill, 2015. His re-
search interests include Byzantine philosophy, Orthodox theology, dialogue
between Byzantium and Islam, and urbanism.

Brenda Mariana Méndez-Gallardo

Professor of Medieval Philosophy and Philosophy of Religion, Jesuit Ibero-
American University, Mexico City and Western Institute of Technology and
Higher Studies, Guadalajara, Mexico. She researches patristic, ancient and
medieval philosophy; the philosophy of art and aesthetics (with particular
interest in spiritual thought in the visual arts); aesthetic and apophatic the-
ology, and the philosophy of religion. She recently published La visión de lo
invisible. El concepto de imagen en la Expositio fidei de Juan Damasceno (2020).

Theocharis S. Papavissarion
National & Kapodistrian University of Athens. PhD (Athens, 2019), thesis: ‘St
John Damascene’s Teaching on Matter. The Ktisiological Foundation of his
Anti-Manichaean Theology’. He is an Orthodox theologian specializing in pa-
tristics. He focuses on John Damascene, the continuity of the ecclesiastic tra-
dition, and Manichaean and Byzantine theology and philosophy. He has pub-
lished articles in encyclopedias and journals examining certain subjects of
patristic literature.

Peter Schadler
Assistant Professor, Dickinson College, Carlisle, Pennsylvania, USA. DPhil (Ox-
ford, 2011), which formed the basis of his recent book: John of Damascus
and Islam: Christian Heresiology and the Intellectual Background to Earliest
Christian-Muslim Relations (Brill, 2018). He is currently researching the narra-
tology in hagiography and storytelling in Byzantium and beyond.

Petros Tsagkaropoulos
Kings College London, England. PhD (King’s, London, 2019), thesis: ‘The Hagio-
graphic Homilies of John of Damascus: A Study in Byzantine Homiletics’. His
xiv notes on contributors

research specializes in Byzantine literature and history, including literary anal-

ysis and interdisciplinary hermeneutical approaches through insightfully de-
veloping new research methods.

Robert Volk
Bavarian Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Munich. DrPhil (Munich,
1987), thesis: ‘Der medizinische Inhalt der Schriften des Michael Psellos’, pub-
lished under the same title (Munich: 1990). His research is centered on the
philology and publication of the writings of John of Damascus. He is currently
preparing the publication of several of the many Lives of St John Damascene.

Johannes Zachhuber
Professor of Historical and Systematic Theology, University of Oxford. He has
published widely on Eastern patristic thought including Human Nature in Gre-
gory of Nyssa: Philosophical Background and Theological Significance (1999) and
The Rise of Christian Theology and the End of Ancient Metaphysics: Patristic Phi-
losophy from the Cappadocian Fathers to John of Damascus (2020).

Anna Zhyrkova
Jesuit University Ignatianum, Cracow, Poland. PhD (Catholic University, Lub-
lin, 2002), thesis: ‘Philosophy of John Damascene in the Light of the “Pege
Gnoseos”’. Her research interests center on Byzantine philosophy and Patristic
theology.
Maps

Acknowledgement

The maps were originally produced by David A. Michelson, map editor, and
Ian Mladjou, cartographer, for The Syriac World, Daniel King, ed. (Routledge,
2019). The five maps presented here are a subset of fourteen maps originally
produced. Michelson provides an excellent discussion of the data as well as
pointers to Internet based resources with bibliography (The Syriac World, xxvii–
xxxiii). Michelson graciously provided our project with the maps under a cre-
ative commons license, and we have chosen to present the five that cover Syria,
Palestine, and the Egyptian territory most germane to the study of John of Dam-
ascus.
Maps 1–5 Copyright cc by-sa
xvi maps

map 1 Near East after the Islamic Conquest (L)

maps xvii

map 2 Near East after the Islamic Conquest (R)

 xviii maps

map 3 Northern Syria, Cilicia, and Cyprus

map 4 Lebanon & southern Syria

 maps xix

map 5 Egypt and Palestine

Introduction
Scott Ables

Overview

Born out of a workshop on John of Damascus and expanded with invited essays,
this volume aims to contribute to the research on John that provides evidence
for the originality of his thought, challenging the commonplace that he was no
more than a compiler of tradition. John’s biography suffers from related prob-
lems. So little was known of John that rising interest in his work required the
invention of a life worthy of celebration. I will briefly cover John’s biography
not only to place him in context, but also to prepare the ground for the philo-
logical work of one of John’s current editors, Robert Volk, who will address the
complexity of the many Lives of John of Damascus in our first chapter. After
that I will briefly sketch the background of this still common assessment of
John that considers him no more than a compiler of tradition, an unoriginal
thinker who had nothing of his own to say. Finally, while outlining our method-
ological framework, I will touch on some of the research contributions of our
international contributors that provides clear evidence that John was an origi-
nal thinker who was more than a mere compiler of tradition.

Biography

John of Damascus remains the most significant theologian of the eighth cen-
tury for those churches of both East and West that accepted the Council of
Chalcedon. Although the precise dates of his birth and death are unknown, his
lifespan was roughly contemporaneous with the Umayyad Caliphate (651–750).
Unfortunately, very little is known about him, and what is put forth is compli-
cated by over a dozen late fictional vitae. The most prominent for the tradition
is the Life of our holy Father, John Damascene (bhg 884). Nevertheless, some
details of John’s life are consistent, but a glance at the tradition is important as
it informs the recent debate on John’s originality.
According to the traditional accounts of John’s life, largely based on bhg 884,
he received a classical education from a monk, Kosmas, an Italian prisoner of
war, freed from the Arabs by John’s father. And, although rising to high rank in
the caliphal administration, Arab persecution convinced John to renounce his
position to become a monk of the Monastery of St Sabas sometime between

© Scott Ables, 2023 | doi:10.1163/9789004526860_002

2 ables

717–725 (scholars vary) where he writes iconophile treatises in defense of icons

and later the Expositio fidei (aka On the Orthodox Faith), his classic dogmatic
work, eventually dying in that monastery about 749. This tradition is problem-
atic, however, not least because bhg 884 is late and of disputed authorship;
nevertheless, it is commonly mined for details by modern biographers, perhaps
best represented by the biography The Life of our Holy Father John Damascene
published by Migne.1
Unfortunately, there is earlier evidence which suggests John was not resi-
dent or perhaps even associated with the Monastery of St Sabas or even that
he left service under duress.2 Further, the biographies based on these late Lives
propose chronologies that hinge on that of Byzantine Iconoclasm, failing to
account for the vast majority of John’s oeuvre, while implying untenably that
it was undertaken while in caliphal service or so late and in a remote monastic
context so as to be compressed into the last twenty years of his life. Much of
this traditional account is undermined by earlier data, so much so that Vassa
Kontouma considers this tradition a ‘legendary portrait’.3 Nevertheless, we do
know a few things with somewhat more certainty.
John was born and raised at court in Damascus under Islam to a prosperous
and powerful family, the Manṣūrs. This is not a Greek name, but a local one,
whether Syrian or Arab is unclear. John’s grandfather was commissioned by
the Byzantine emperor Maurice (reigned 582–602) to collect the taxes for the
entire region of Syria; this commission was renewed under the emperor Her-
aclius (reigned 610–641), after a brief period of Persian occupation (614–628)
under which it was also maintained. John’s family was somehow involved—
accounts vary—in the surrender of Damascus to the Arabs (in 634) and among
those who considered this treachery, the taint on the family name was long
remembered even by members of their own sectarian party, the Melkites, e.g.
by Eutychius, Melkite bishop of Alexandria, writing in the tenth century.4 John’s
father retained his position and is even reported to have been a very close friend
of the caliph ʿAbd al-Malik (reigned 685–705). Educated to elite levels, John fol-
lowed his father into the Arab administration. Nevertheless, John also became
a monk and a priest. He left the administration, and as a close friend of the

1 pg 94.429–489. For example, see the following brief articles on John of Damascus, which
summarize his life in terms of bhg 884, even while acknowledging its legendary character:
Kazhdan and Talbot (1998), Berardino (2000), Volk (2000), and Döpp and Geerlings (2000).
2 Marie-France Auzépy (2015: 399, 408).
3 Kontouma (2015: I, 2). Kontouma has suggested that on balance John probably left Damascus
and joined in the reestablishment of the patriarchate of Jerusalem in 705. I have written in
support of this view, initially in Ables (2016) and later in Ables (2019).
4 Breydy (1985: 116–117, German trans.).
introduction 3

Patriarch of Jerusalem, John v (ca. 705–735), he moved to Jerusalem to partici-

pate in the re-founding of the patriarchate left vacant by Arab policy after the
obscure death of the previous patriarch, Sophronius. John’s initial fame grew
as an eloquent preacher in Jerusalem. His hymns and sermons are all liturgi-
cal, his polemic and dogmatic works have been described as catechetical, and
his polemic taught Chalcedonian monks persuasive rhetoric useful in theolog-
ical debate all in the service of developing patriarchal policy in the strongly
sectarian Jerusalem of the early eighth century. He was the last significant Chal-
cedonian theologian to write in Greek in Syro-Palestine before Arabic became
dominant.5
John’s fame began to spread outside of Palestine with three impassioned
orations in defense of the liturgical use of icons, which pitted him against the
Byzantine iconoclasts and resulted in his condemnation at the iconoclast coun-
cil of Hiera in 754. Nevertheless, even before the demise of iconoclasm, John’s
works began to circulate in Constantinople and Rome, and John was soon
known for his dogmatic works, especially the Fount of Knowledge.6 These dog-
matic works so effectively summarized the early (Greek) church fathers that
the Latin West used them as an epitome of those fathers, and their subsequent
translation into Latin in the twelfth century and use by Peter Lombard, Thomas
Aquinas, and others ensured a wide dissemination in the West. In fact, John’s
pervasive influence in the West eventually resulted in Pope Leo xiii elevating
him to a ‘Doctor of the Church’ on August 9, 1890. The last Greek theologian to
be so honored in the West.

Background: More Than a Compiler

It has long been a commonplace that John of Damascus was no more than
a compiler of tradition saying nothing original. This perception may stem in
part from John’s own repeated claim to say nothing new.7 Upon closer inspec-
tion, however, we find that John is employing a modesty topos common to the

5 Syriac, of course, remained the literary and liturgical language of those West and East Syrians
who rejected the Council of Chalcedon.
6 A tripartite work comprised of the Dialectica (cpg 8041), De haeresibus (cpg 8044), and the
Expositio fidei (cpg 8043), this last is also known as On the Orthodox Faith.
7 For example, ‘I, sinful and wretched, open my muttering stuttering lips’ John of Damascus,
Instit. 1 (20, 8–9 Kotter 1969): ἀνοίγω τὰ μογγίλαλα καὶ βραδύγλωσσα χείλη ὁ ἁμαρτωλὸς καὶ τάλας
ἐγώ, or ‘As I have said I will say nothing, but with great care gathering into one that of the most
eminent teachers, as much as I am able, I will draft a brief treatise yielding to your command
in all things.’Dial. Proem. (53, 60–63 Kotter): Ἐρῶ δὲ ἐμὸν μέν, ὡς ἔφην, οὐδέν, τὰ δὲ τοῖς ἐγκρίτοις
4 ables

rhetoric of well-educated Byzantine authors.8 And, on one significant occasion,

John apologizes for his high style, while acknowledging his rhetorical talent,
and offers a revised treatise written in a lower register for a popular audience.9
Further, it may be that the recognition of John as a key bridge figure mediat-
ing the Greek Church Fathers to the Latin West led to the assessment that John
contributed little but the faithful transmission of the Greek tradition, so as not
to raise questions about the faithfulness of his epitome of the Greek tradition.
John’s work had become a proxy for the Greek tradition in the West which
may have led to the conflation of his work with that tradition. This was per-
haps in part because the idea that John might have said something of his own
became synonymous for some with the idea that he may have tampered with
or somehow modified that tradition, which was unthinkable, especially for
those with confessional commitments to the concept of an original doctrinal
deposit faithfully transmitted. Consequently, because of this lasting impres-
sion, whether precisely for the reasons outlined or others, he was thought to
be no more than a compiler of tradition saying nothing new, so he himself has
remained understudied. The aim of the Oxford workshop and the essays pre-
sented here is to suggest ways in which this assessment is mistaken. John is
rather a creative and original thinker, who made his sources his own, preserv-
ing and transmitting tradition while shaping and presenting it theologically
and liturgically in locally relevant ways. But, I speak proleptically of the essays
herein which must speak for themselves. Next, I turn to the background of the
common assessment that John was entirely derivative by design being no more
than a compiler of tradition.
The study of John of Damascus can be divided into three periods related to
the production of modern critical texts, which have finally set the stage for a
reevaluation of John’s body of work. These include the period prior to the crit-
ical texts, that leading to their publication, and that based on them.

Phase 1: Research Prior to the Critical Texts

In the earliest period opinion was eventually summarized by Adolf von Har-
nack. But there were previous formative statements leading to his own assess-
ment like that of F. Perrier (1862), who after studying the life and work of John of
Damascus, concluded, ‘His exaggerated respect for the writings and opinions of
the authors who preceded him stifled every germ of independence and individ-

τῶν διδασκάλων πεπονημένα εἰς ἓν συλλεξάμενος, ὅση δύναμις, συντετμημένον τὸν λόγον ποιήσομαι
κατὰ πάντα ὑπείκων τῷ ὑμετέρῳ προστάγματι.
8 On John’s use of the topos, see Alexakis (2004), and more generally, see Kazhdan (1991).
9 John of Damascus, Imag. ii, 1 (2.1–31 Kotter). For English translation see Louth (2003: 59–60).
introduction 5

uality. This same feeling also prevented him from being original and made his
work a clever and conscientious compilation.’10 Or, that of J. Lupton (1882), who
wrote, ‘I am not aware of any more serious charge that can be brought against
him than … a tendency to over-credulity and superstition.’11 And, finally, shortly
after the Pope’s elevation of John in 1890, Harnack fires back in his influential
History of Dogma (1894):

In many respects the whole historical development of Dogma from the

fourth century to John of Damascus and Theodore the Studite was sim-
ply a vast process of reduction, selection, and definition. In the East we
are no longer called upon to deal in any quarter with new and original
matter, but always rather with what is traditional, derivative, and, to an
increasing extent, superstitious.12

And, later Harnack concludes:

If we compare, e.g., Gregory of Nyssa with John of Damascus it is easy to

see that the former still really thinks independently, while the latter con-
fines himself to editing what is given. It is above all clear that the critical
elements of theology had been lost.13

Phase 2: Research Leading to the Publication of the Critical Texts

Harnack’s assessment would influence the consensus for generations and is
perhaps still not without influence. Nevertheless, research on the critical texts
nuanced this view. This second period is dominated by those authors affili-
ated with the Byzantine Institute of the Scheyern Abbey, Germany, publish-
ing between 1951 and 1964: J.M. Hoeck, B. Studer, B. Kotter, K. Rozemond, and
G. Richter.14 The Institute continued its research and began publication of the
critical texts of John of Damascus, starting in 1969 (ed. Bonifatius Kotter). These
scholars initially reinforced the consensus view of the previous period. Perhaps,

10 Perrier (1862: 33). ‘Son respect exagéré pour les écrits et les opinions des auteurs qui l’ont
précédé a étouffé en lui tout germe d’indépendance et d’individualité. Ce même sentiment
l’a aussi empêché d’être original, et a fait de ses ouvrages une savante et consciencieuse
compilation.’ F.A. Perrier, Jean Damascène: Sa vie et ses écrits (Strasbourg: Université of
France, 1862), 33.
11 Lupton (1882: 199, 209–210). J.H. Lupton (1882), St. John of Damascus (London: spck), 199,
209–210.
12 Harnack (1972: vii–viii).
13 Harnack (1972: 156).
14 Hoeck (1951), Studer (1956), Kotter (1959), Rozemond (1959), Richter (1964).
6 ables

Studer (1956) sums them up when he concludes John is a mere compiler play-
ing only a mediating role between East and West, and thus ‘can be granted no
great place in the development of theology’.15
However, there seems always to have been a minority voice that held John
in high esteem. Frederick Chase published what remains the standard English
translation of the Font of Knowledge, comprised of John’s On Heresies, The Philo-
sophical Chapters, and On the Orthodox Faith. Now dated because it is not based
on the critical texts, yet it remains the best English translation of John’s mag-
num opus. No doubt aware of the consensus position and the early support of
it by the Byzantine Institute, Chase nonetheless was unequivocal in his positive
assessment of John in 1958:

Most authorities are of the opinion that the Damascene succeeded quite
well in keeping his promise to add nothing of his own, but this is not
entirely true. The Fount of Knowledge not only contains much that is orig-
inal and a fresh viewpoint on many things but is in itself something new.
It is the first real Summa Theologica. Even the philosophical introduction
is new, being the first attempt to present a complete manual of philoso-
phy to serve as a basis for the study of Christian theology. The whole work
is not a mere compilation; it is a new synthesis. It may be said, then, that
although John of Damascus was undoubtedly sincere in his promise to
add nothing of his own, he could not help injecting so much of himself as
to be visible on almost every page.16

Perhaps in time Kotter recalled this assessment, but whatever the case, Kotter’s
views softened in time allowing for some nuance. Although initially consistent
with other institute scholars when introducing the Expositio fidei in 1973, by
1981 he was willing to grant that John’s argument in the Contra Manichaeos, for
example, was a masterpiece of theological thinking that exceeded his sources
especially on Providence.17

15 Studer (1956: 134).

16 Chase (1958: xxv–xxvi).
17 Compare the early Kotter (1973: xxvii), where he takes John’s statements to say nothing
new at face value, to the later Kotter (1981: 343–344), where he suggests John in the Con-
tra Manichaeos, for example, has provided a ‘masterpiece of seldom achieved depth’ that
offers ‘the last word on the problem of evil’, going well beyond his sources with both
new arguments and the complete reconsideration of the old with theological thinking
‘incomparably deeper, especially regarding Providence.’ Yet it is often the early statement
regarding the oft studied Expos. that is still repeated, not that of the later less studied
polemical works, which is doubly ironic, since the Expos. was no doubt written well after
introduction 7

Phase 3: Research Based on the Critical Texts

The publications by the Byzantine Institute of the critical texts themselves
(published 1969, 1973, 1981, 1988, picking up again in 2008) have inspired new
research.18 Space constraints will allow only three representative examples:
Twombly (1992), Kontouma (1995), and Griffith (2006).19 Twombly’s 1992 un-
published doctorate cited by Louth (2002) was quietly influential.20 By the time
of its publication in 2015 over twenty years later, Louth would write, ‘St. John
Damascene famously said, “I shall say nothing of my own”, and much mod-
ern scholarship has taken him at his word. Yet, as Charles Twombly shows,
John Damascene was a truly original theologian.’21 Just as quietly Kontouma’s
1995 article (Conticello at that time) reappropriated for John the brilliance of
Trinitarian perichōrēsis, once attributed to Pseudo-Cyril for which he was said
to be ‘an accomplished and truly profound thinker’, which John appeared to
adopt wholesale; Kontouma’s argument meant that that brilliance was John’s
not a source of John’s.22 In 2002 her argument was considered by Louth ‘abso-
lutely compelling’, and remains unchallenged (as far as I know); it has been
republished in Kontouma (2015).23 Finally, these developments have not gone
unnoticed by those engaged in interdisciplinary work, such as Sidney Griffith,
who has long argued for treatment of John of Damascus in his local context:

Melkite theology found its first and most authoritative exponent in the
person of St John of Damascus …. The most instructive feature in this
connection … is the fact that the overall pattern of his interests … demon-
strates that his immediate theological and ecclesiastical near horizon was
very much that of Jerusalem …. He was only tangentially concerned with

the polemical works, especially the Manich. which many think to be among John’s earliest
works.
18 Unfortunately, virtually no monographs on John were published after the Byzantine Insti-
tute grew silent, but there was a ray of hope in Louth (2002), perhaps not quite challenging
the consensus view, his accessibility enabled many to study John for the first time, and
thus Andrew Louth is perhaps arguably responsible more than any other for inspiring
new researchers to enter the field focused on John. Many of us (if not all) owe him a great
debt.
19 Twombly’s research was published later as Twombly (2015) in which he modified his posi-
tion to accept Kontouma’s conclusion that Pseudo-Cyril was in fact a compilation based
on John and not a source of John, evidence of the growing influence her 1995 article has
had over time.
20 See Louth (2002: 112n75).
21 Twombly (2015: volume epigraph).
22 Prestige (1952: 280).
23 Louth (2002: 87).
8 ables

… Byzantium …. Failure to take seriously the immediate intellectual and

cultural horizon of Jerusalem, within which St John actually composed
his works, is a serious error of perspective ….24

This volume, and the Oxford workshop it is based on, are part of this trend in
positive reassessment of John of Damascus taking his contextualization and
contributions seriously. Yet more work is required if this minority position is to
become the consensus.

Methodology

The recent challenges to John’s biography and the consensus view that he is
theologically derivative and thus uninteresting have invited reconsideration of
John’s work, but the standard biography and the consensus view remain stub-
bornly entrenched. Consequently, the following essays aim to provide further
evidence for John’s creativity, originality, and consequent theological impor-
tance. The essays were not solicited in two groups, but these broad group-
ings emerged as our project took shape. After the workshop, the invited essays
seemed to fit into these two categories as well, providing for a balanced presen-
tation. Unfortunately, the obvious lacuna here remains that of John of Dam-
ascus studies generally—the lack of liturgical analysis—; although John is
reported to have written large portions of the Eastern liturgy, the details remain
obscure.25 Nevertheless, here his sources, vitae, context, and theological vision
at least are considered in part, hopefully inspiring further research.

Part One—The Damascene’s Sources, Life, and Context

Robert Volk, successor to Bonifatius Kotter as editor of John of Damascus,
continues the work of the Byzantine Institute now under the auspices of the
Bavarian Academy of Sciences and Humanities. In the spirit of those early
preparatory publications of the Byzantine Institute of the Scheyern Abbey,
near Munich, Volk offers an assessment of the Greek vitae of John as he pre-
pares to publish modern critical editions of them. Complementing Volk’s essay,
Habib Ibrahim offers a rare glimpse into new evidence from unpublished Ara-

24 Griffith (2006: 191–192). For recent treatment of John in his local context, see Awad (2018).
25 Another lacuna is that of comparative Syriac studies: Was John in dialog with impor-
tant Syrian Orthodox contemporaries, including Severus Sebokht (d. 666/7), Athanasius
of Balad (d. 696), Jacob of Edessa (d. 708), and George, bishop of the Arabs (d. 724), for
example?
introduction 9

bic sources of John both with an essay and with the first English translation of
John’s Expositio et declaratio fidei (cpg 8078).26
With the third and fourth essays (Ables and Adrahtas), we begin looking at
John’s sources and his creative theological appropriation in terms suggestive of
part two but largely focused on the internal development of John’s theological
program touching on implications for the dating of John’s work. Peter Schadler
then explores the possibility of meaning in the ordering of borrowed mate-
rials in the Expositio, while Najib George Awad investigates the source of the
‘Arian Monk’ who is reported to have influenced Muḥammad by recontextual-
izing the figure out of Constantinopolitan sectarian debate into contemporary
interreligious debate in Syro-Palestine once again suggesting that John is bet-
ter understood when interpreted within his local Syro-Palestinian context. The
final essay in Part One (Tsagkaropoulos) turns to John’s sermons as evidence
for the ‘preservation of his theological alertness’ concluding that theology was
not the privileged concern of the elite alone, but that John was ‘an ambitious
preacher’ who shaped his contemporary theological presentation to the needs
of his local audience. Part One is thus focused on capturing John as he was and
not as who he was revered to be by tradition.

Part Two—The Damascene’s Theological Vision and Philosophical

Method
The essays in the second part treat John’s theological vision (sacraments, imago
dei, and the concept of matter) and philosophical appropriation (integral to
theological method, central to development of the concept of the universal,
and reinterpreted provides worthwhile answers to modern philosophical prob-
lems) with three essays on each. Anna Zhyrkova argues that for John philoso-
phy was central precisely because it was useful in the service of his theology.
It afforded him a precision that allowed him to improve upon his predeces-
sors and address the inconsistencies he perceived in his interlocutors. Part Two
begins with Vassa Kontouma’s examination of the sacraments in John, which
entails peeling away traditional western readings of John that have obscured
his theological project. Dr Kontouma has been researching and publishing on
John since 1995. Aware of the Byzantine Institutes’ publications and position on
John, she has been steadily pushing back, not least with her study that found
Pseudo-Cyril to be a late compilation based on John not a source of John (as
noted above). Just as the Expositio was the focus of Kontouma’s work, so it is
the subject of Brenda Mariana Méndez-Gallardo’s work on the Image of God.

26 For the translation see the Appendix.

10 ables

Kontouma looks at sacramental doctrine in John,27 while Dr. Méndez-Gallardo

focuses on the Image of God within this sacramental context, particularly in
terms of icons, as a means to explore John’s theological anthropology.
Dr. Zhyrkova argues that John has fully anticipated any Medieval Scholastic
vision of the centrality of philosophy in theological discourse, while Johannes
Zachhuber offers a snapshot of his recent book on the topic of the develop-
ment of the concept of universals in late antique theological discourse, signifi-
cant because it culminates in the decisive contributions of the Syro-Palestinian
Greek Theologian John of Damascus (not a Latin Medieval as often suggested).
Dr. Zachhuber’s Workshop session was the best attended (if memory serves),
so I expect it will generate wide interest as the field of Byzantine Philosophy
grows. Finally, Smilen Markov offers a clear picture of why it is so important
not to obscure voices like John’s, suggesting that Martin Heidegger’s (d. 1976)
project to uncover the historicity of being was actually anticipated by John if
interpreted appropriately. Many will find this essay informing their take not
only on John’s usefulness in historical philosophical research but in the debates
on the necessity of the idea of a specifically Byzantine Philosophy.
In sum, synergies between essays are more obvious between those in their
respective part (one or two); nevertheless, certain essays do complement or
interact with each other in significant ways or act as significant prolegomena
to recent external works. For example, internal synergies can be seen between
the part one and two essays of Ables and Papavissarion, which both look at
the early John in the Contra Manichaeos, and that of Schadler and Kontouma,
both of which look at the structure of the Expositio from related but differ-
ent angles. External synergies include the essays by Najib George Awad and
Johannes Zachhuber, for example, both of which provide an entrée to their
respective monographs.

27 Ecclesiology is consider by many to be a lacuna common to many early or Byzantine Greek

Theologians, and so it is said of John of Damascus as well; however, Kontouma suggests a
rather interesting reason for this: the church is constituted by the ‘logos of the cross’ and
‘baptism and the Eucharist are the means by which [people] enter’ suggesting that John
simply envisions ecclesiology as the result of the sacraments, the object of sacramental
theology rather than viewing them as the efficient cause of salvation in the individual
they are that of the church, the collection of individuals engaged in the process of salva-
tion. Kontouma does not explore the implications of this here, but it is an example of the
vast unexplored territory of John of Damascus studies.
introduction 11

Conclusion

I finish this introduction, however, noting that these essays are not the last word
on any of their respective subject matter. Although anchored by senior John
of Damascus scholars like Volk, Kontouma, and Zhyrkova, this volume shines
with future promise featuring recent doctorates on John of Damascus (Ables,
Ibrahim, Markov, Méndez-Gallardo, Papavissarion, Schadler, and Tsagkaropou-
los). John of Damascus studies remain in their adolescence, but each of these
essays not only contribute to his study, but hopefully, will inspire others to
reconsider dismissive assessments that continue to claim that John is merely
derivative with at best a talent for selection. John of Damascus should be recon-
sidered; indeed, hopefully these essays have begun to demonstrate that John is
more than a compiler, that he is actually an original, creative, and innovative
thinker, who no less than systematic theologians today, reappropriated the tra-
dition to meet the challenges faced in his local context with a subtlety that has
been too often missed.

Bibliography

Primary Sources
Eutychius of Alexandria, Annals (Alexandrian Recension), ed. Michael Breydy, Das
Annalenwerk des Eutychios von Alexandrien: ausgewählte Geschichten und Leg-
enden Kompiliert von saʿid Ibn Baṭrīq um 935a.d. (csco 471, 472; Leuven: Peeters,
1985).
John of Damascus, Capita philosophica (Dialectica), ed. Bonifatius Kotter, Die Schriften
des Johannes von Damaskos, vol. 1 (Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 1969), 47–146.
John of Damascus, Expositio fidei, ed. Bonifatius Kotter, Die Schriften des Johannes von
Damaskos, vol. 2 (Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 1973), 1–239.
John of Damascus, Liber de haeresibus, ed. Bonifatius Kotter, Die Schriften des Johannes
von Damaskos, vol. 4 (Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 1981), 19–67.
John of Damascus, Contra imaginum calumniatores orationes tres, ed. Bonifatius Kotter,
Die Schriften des Johannes von Damaskos, vol. 2 (Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 1975),
65–200. English trans. Andrew Louth, Three Treatises on the Divine Images (Crest-
wood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2003).
Life of our Holy Father, John Damascene [bhg 884], in: Patrologia Cursus Completus.
Series Graeca, ed. Jacques Paul Migne, et al., pg 94, 162 vols. (Paris: 1857–1866): cols.
429–489.
12 ables

Secondary Literature
Ables, Scott (2020): ‘Development in Theological Method and Argument in John of
Damascus’, in: jecs 28/4 (Winter), 625–653.
Ables, Scott (2019): ‘Was the Reestablishment of the Jerusalem Patriarchate A “Proto-
Melkite” Gambit Orchestrated by John of Damascus—Quid pro quo, Cathedral for
Patriarchate?’ in: aram 31 1/2 (Nov), 107–120.
Ables, Scott (2017): ‘The Rhetoric of Persuasion in the Polemic of John of Damascus’, in:
StP 96/22, 457–468.
Ables, Scott (2016): The Purpose of Perichōrēsis in the Works of John of Damascus [PhD
thesis]. University of Oxford.
Ables, Scott (2015): ‘John of Damascus on Genus and Species’, in: Philosophy in Byzan-
tium: The Ways of Byzantine Philosophy, Mikonja Knežević (ed.) (Alhambra, CA:
Sebastian Press), 271–287.
Ables, Scott (2013): ‘Did John of Damascus Modify His Sources in the De fide orthodoxa?’,
in: StP 68/16, 355–361.
Alexakis, Alexander (2004): ‘The Modesty Topos and John of Damascus as a Not-So-
Modest Author’, in: bz 97/2, 521–530.
Auzépy, Marie-France (2015): ‘From Palestine to Constantinople (Eighth-Ninth Cen-
turies): Stephen the Sabaite and John of Damascus’, in: Scott F. Johnson, ed., Lan-
guages and Cultures of Eastern Christianity: Greek (Aldershot: Ashgate Variorum),
399–442.
Awad, Najib George (2018): Umayyad Christianity: John of Damascus as a contextual
example of identity formation in Early Islam (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press).
Berardino, Angelo di, ed. (2000): Patrology: The Eastern Fathers from the Council of Chal-
cedon (451) to John of Damascus (750), trans. Adrian Walford (Institutum Patristicum
Augustinianum: James Clarke).
Chase, Frederic H., Jr. (ed. and trans.) (1958): St. John of Damascus: Writings (The Fathers
of the Church 37; Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press).
Conticello, Vassa S. (1995): ‘Pseudo-Cyril’s De ss. Trinitate: A Compilation of Joseph
the Philosopher’, in: Orientalia Christiana Periodica 61, 117–129. Republished in Kon-
touma (2015).
Kontouma, Vassa (2015): John of Damascus: New Studies on his Life and Works (Farn-
ham, Surrey/Burlington, VT: Ashgate).
Cross, Richard (2000): ‘Perichoresis, Deification, and Christological Predication in John
of Damascus’, in: Medieval Studies 62, 69–124.
Erismann, Christoph (2011): ‘A World of Hypostases: John of Damascus’ Rethinking of
Aristotle’s Categorical Ontology’, in: StP 50, 269–287.
Griffith, Sidney H. (2006): ‘The Church of Jerusalem and the “Melkites”: The Making
of an “Arab Orthodx” Christian Identity in the World of Islam (750–1050CE)’, in:
Ora Limor and Guy G. Stroumsa (eds.), Christians and Christianity in the Holy Land
(Turnhout: Brepols), 175–204.
introduction 13

Von Harnack, Adolf (1972): History of Dogma, trans. Neil Buchanan et al., vol 3., 7 vols.
(Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith, original German 1894).
Hoeck, Johannes M. (1951): ‘Stand und Aufgaben der Damaskenos-Forschung,’ in: ocp
17: 5–60.
Kazhdan, Alexander and Alice-Mary Talbot (eds.) (1998): Dumbarton Oaks Hagiogra-
phy Database (Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks).
Kazhdan, Alexander P. (1991): ‘s.v. Modesty, Topos of’, in: Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium
(New York: oup).
Kontouma, Vassa (2015): ‘John of Damascus (c. 655–c. 745)’ in: John of Damascus: New
Studies on his Life and Works (Ashgate: UK), i, 1–43.
Kotter, Bonifatius (1959): Die Überlieferung der Pege Gnoseos des hl. Johannes von Da-
maskos, in: spb 5.
Kotter, Bonifatius, ed. (1973–1981): Die Schriften des Johannes von Damaskos, 4 vols.
(Berlin/New York: de Gruyter).
Prestige, George L. (1952): God in Patristic Thought (London: spck).
Richter, Gerhard (1964): Die Dialektik des Johannes von Damaskos: Eine Untersuchung
des Textes nach seinen Quellen und seiner Bedeutung, in: spb 10.
Rozemond, Keetje (1959): La christologie de saint Jean Damascene, in: spb 8.
Studer, Basilius (1956): Die theologische Arbeitsweise des Johannes von Damaskus, in: spb
2.
Twombly, Charles Craig (2015): Perichoresis and Personhood (Eugene, OR: Pickwick).
Twombly, Charles Craig (1992): Perichōrēsis and Personhood in the Thought of John of
Damascus [PhD diss.]. Emery University.
Volk, Robert (2000): ‘John Damascene’, in: Siegmar Döpp and Wilhelm Geerlings (eds.),
Dictionary of Early Christian Literature (New York: Crossroad), 338–339.
Zachhuber, Johannes (2020): The Rise of Christian Theology and the End of Ancient
Metaphysics: Patristic Philosophy from the Cappadocian Fathers to John of Damas-
cus (Oxford: oup).
 part 1
The Damascene’s Sources, Life, and Context

∵
 chapter 1

The Greek Lives of St John Damascene: Common

Information, Differences, and Historical Value

Robert Volk

The Bibliotheca Hagiographica Graeca (bhg) lists altogether 18 bio-hagiograph-

ical texts on St John Damascene, in three different locations within this refer-
ence book. Three of these 18 texts are still not edited or printed at all, namely
bhg 885h, 885k, and 885m. Seven of them need a new, critical edition (bhg 394,
395, 884, 884a, 885, 885b, 885c). Based on this, one finds that the numbers of
the bhg are not allocated on the basis of internal details; they do not inform
us to which group a text belongs. Two groups of longer texts are extant: In the
first (represented by bhg 394, 884a), only one person called Cosmas appears.
In the second group (represented by bhg 885b, 884 [depending from an Ara-
bic text], 394a, 395, 885), two persons called Cosmas appear. The focus of
many shorter texts is the miracle of John’s severed hand cured by the Holy
Virgin; post byzantine [bhg 885c] belongs to the genre of texts dealing with
‘converting the caliph’.1 These editions of the mentioned texts are now well
underway, and their publication should be possible in the course of the year
2023.

Introduction

Around the year 670—more likely earlier than later—John of Damascus was
born, and he probably passed away between 745 and 750, speaking conser-
vatively. As it is generally known, there has been little biographical evidence
preserved for him written during his lifetime. The meagre information in the
Syrian apologetic letter of a monophysite named Elias to a friend, the ortho-
dox Synkellos Leon of Harran, is such a rarity—and perhaps even the only one:
Not later than 743 John Damascene is mentioned as egregius in parte vestra (i.e.
‘outstanding on your orthodox side’).2

1 Rochow (2007: 59 with n. 124).

2 Van Roey (1985: 69, 24–25); cf. Kontouma (2015: I, 4).

© Robert Volk, 2023 | doi:10.1163/9789004526860_003

18 volk

John’s activities against the iconoclasts are culminating in the anathemata

of the iconoclastic synod at Hiereia (754), which are cited and then abol-
ished in the acts of Nicaea ii (787). The sentence ‘The Trinity has rejected
these three persons’ (namely Patriarch Germanos, Georgios of Cyprus, and
John of Damascus) is no proof of the death of the three condemned ones.
‘Ἡ τριὰς τοὺς τρεῖς καθεῖλεν’3—we often encounter this expression, denoting
spiritual death, also in earlier council acts (see the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae
online). Many people characterized as rejected by the Trinity were still alive
after those councils. Thus, theoretically, John of Damascus could have been
alive in 754.

Early Sources of Biographical Data

Before a real Life was created, there existed some scattered information about
John: The Life of Saint Stephen the Younger [bhg 1666], written ca. 809, treats St
John as a defender of the holy icons. This text is even cited in the Arabic Life.4
In [bhg 884], having as source this Arabic Life, the material from [bhg 1666]
has been shortened very much.5
The Byzantine chronicle of Theophanes, written ca. 815, is an early source,
too; there we find material linked directly to the caliphate—for the first time
John appears with the byname Χρυσορρόας, i.e. ‘the man who exudes gold’, and
he is described as a priest, monk, and excellent teacher.6 Further information
given by Theophanes is about the activities of John’s father in the service for
the caliph7 and about the anathemata of the synod at Hiereia (754).8
Even a little earlier, around 800, a certain Stephanus Sabaites (perhaps a
nephew of John), wrote a canon for December the 4th, common for Barbara
and John of Damascus. This text frequently came down to us in the Menaea,9 it
mentions some of his writings against different heresies, but it does not support
the theory that John became a monk of the Sabas monastery.
Already an entry in the Bibliotheca Hagiographica Graeca—[bhg 885g]—
bears the quite modest article on John of Damascus, present in the Suda-

3 Krannich, Schubert, and Sode (2002: 68).

4 Auzépy (1997: 122–126, §§27–28); Graf (1913: 186–188).
5 pg 94, 484,47–488,6.
6 De Boor (1883: i 408, 25–27).
7 De Boor (1883: i 365,21–28).
8 De Boor (1883: i 417,14–20).
9 Cf. e. g. Menaea (1892: ii 360–371).
the greek lives of st john damascene 19

Lexicon from the 10th century10—its length is nine printed lines. It is based
on the epitome of the Onomatologos of Hesychius from Miletus (6th century),
expanded in the 9th century by Christian biographies. We learn John’s byname
Mansur, and after some phrases praising his erudition some of his works are
enumerated—various canons and especially the Sacra Parallela (εἴς τε τὴν θείαν
γραφὴν Παράλληλοι κατ᾽ ἐκλογήν). The latter, a very extensive florilegium in
several volumes, is—as we know today—a work compiled long before John
Damascene’s heyday, namely in the first quarter of the seventh century, by a
monk John from a monastery near Jerusalem, perhaps even from the Sabas
monastery.11 Together with John, as the Suda says, flourished a certain musi-
cally gifted Kosmas from Jerusalem; no information is given that could identify
this person with John’s adopted brother; the private tutor called Kosmas is not
mentioned either in this Suda article.
With his feast day on the 4th of December, John of Damascus mostly is over-
shadowed by Saint Barbara the martyr. But there are exceptions, too. Between
979 and 989 the Menologium for Emperor Basileios ii († 1025) was composed,
today’s Cod. Vat. gr. 161312 (containing the months September till February);
John of Damascus appears under November 29th, detached from Barbara—she
receives there a single text for the 4th of December. With over 430 miniatures
of prime quality on a gold background, Vat. gr. 1613 is one of the most splendid
Byzantine manuscripts; it came to Italy ca. 1365/66.13 On page 213 we find the
aforementioned text and a miniature showing John and Kosmas, his brother
by adoption, as monks;14 according to the Menologium Basilii, they went to
a monastery—this is a peculiarity—still in the lifetime of John’s father. This
text has no bhg number and needs a new edition, as the printed version from
pg 117, 184, 20–40 does not fully correspond with the scan from the Vatican
Library.

Biographical Data from the Lives of John Damascene

From the longer Lives, [bhg 885b]—sometimes called epitome in the sec-
ondary literature—seems to be the earliest, originating probably from the early
tenth century. In my opinion [bhg 885b] is a very informative text of high

10 Adler (1931: ii, 649, 28–36).

11 Cf. Declerck (2015); Thum (2018: xix with n. 2).
12 Giannelli (1950: 276–278).
13 Schreiner (1997: 156).
14 Reproduced e. g. by Ambros (2015: 80).
20 volk

literary quality. It should have fulfilled the wishes of the monk Michael from
Antioch,15 if he would have had the chance to consult it. From [bhg 885b] we
learn the following: The name of John’s family was Mansur, they were ortho-
dox Christians in Damascus for generations and the Muslims could not convert
them to Islam. John’s father was wealthy and renowned; the caliph held him in
high esteem and entrusted him with the public administration. He was owner
of vast portions of land in Arabia, Damascus, Palestine and other places. Many
prisoners of war, released by him, settled on his estates. Among them was a very
educated man, who was said to have been an asekretis, i.e. a private secretary,
and John’s father took him at his home for the instruction of his children (writ-
ten τέκνα, which refers to John and Kosmas, as we soon learn; however, we do
not know the name of their teacher). After a broad education by this anony-
mous tutor, John abandoned his father’s wealth and became a monk. He had a
companion called Kosmas, who was an orphan raised by John’s father. Similarly
to John, Kosmas, also capable of learning, strived for virtue and the monastic
life, and later became bishop of Maiuma. Both excelled in composing troparia
and canons, which are sung in the church to this day. At the beginning of the
reign of Emperor Leo, as orthodoxy persisted, John traveled to Constantinople
and met patriarch Germanos—this is special information from [bhg 885b];
after his return John busied himself with the study of holy texts. He produced
many lives of saints and holy martyrs. After iconoclasm ensued, he was per-
plexed about the expulsion of patriarch Germanos. He wrote documents about
this heresy and also letters defending the truth. Konstantinos Kopronymos
came into possession of such letters; he held the outrageous synod at Blacher-
nai, read out these letters and cursed both them as well as their author. As the
impious emperor would pronounce those curses, they would however return
upon himself and the orthodox faith would eventually prevail. Saint John was
praised as defender of the truth and piety. Thus, he lived many years in asceti-
cism and study of the divine law; he reached a ripe old age and passed away at
the place of his birth on the 4th of December, praised now and till the end of
times.
The peculiarities of [bhg 885b] are, therefore, the following: Still during the
lifetime of his father we do not learn of any mundane activity of John, before his
retreat to a monastery in Damascus. John embarks on a historically unproven
journey to Constantinople, where he meets Patriarch Germanos. In this ver-
sion of the Vita, the Byzantine iconoclastic emperor does not use John for a
conspiracy against the caliph; hence, the miracle of the amputated hand and

15 For his activities see below.

the greek lives of st john damascene 21

its healing does not occur. He dies in Damascus and is buried in his birth town.
A severely shortened descendant of [bhg 885b] seems to be the text on John
of Damascus in the Synaxarium Constantinopolitanum [bhg 885e].16
Not all this information can be taken at face value. More trustworthy are the
titles of several homilies by John Damascene himself: The first oration about
the Koimesis of the Theotokos [cpg 8061]17 calls John in its title—taken by the
editor, Bonifatius Kotter, from an old witness, Cod. Vat. gr. 2081 (10th century),
fol. 88r—a monk of the Old Laura (‘Ἰωάννου, ταπεινοῦ καὶ ἁμαρτωλοῦ μοναχοῦ,
δούλου τῶν δούλων τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τῆς παλαιᾶς λαύρας’), which
should not be identified with the Sabas Monastery, but with the elder Laura of
St Chariton in the district of Jerusalem.18 The title of the homily In ficum arefac-
tam [cpg 8058]19—taken by Kotter from Cod. Paris. gr. 1476 (a. 890), fol. 62r—
speaks about John as a priest from the Resurrection Church in Jerusalem (‘Ἰωάν-
νου, μοναχοῦ καὶ πρεσβυτέρου τῆς ἁγίας Χριστοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν ἀναστάσεως’). John
adds autobiographical information in a letter—the so-called De hymno trisagio
[cpg 8049]—sent to an archimandrite Iordanes; in a very personal, vivacious
and self-confident sentence he speaks about the trusting relationship with his
tutor, the late patriarch John v (706–735) of Jerusalem: ‘Who knew the thought
of the blessed patriarch John better than me? Nobody. To tell the truth, he never
made a dogmatic remark without referring it to me as his pupil (Τίς γὰρ οἶδε τοῦ
μακαριωτάτου Ἰωάννου τοῦ πατριάρχου νόημα ἐμοῦ πλέον; Οὐδείς. Ὅς, ἵνα τἀληθὲς
εἴπω, οὐκ ἀνέπνευσε πνοὴν δογματικὴν πώποτε, ἣν ἐμοὶ ὡς μαθητῇ οὐκ ἀνέθετο).’20
Many problems—above all chronological ones—are connected with the
Arabic Life,21 which became the framework for the widespread Greek Life
[bhg 884]. Its creation seems very plausible. A certain monk Michael from the
monastery of St Symeon Stylites near Antioch (Miḫāʾīl as-Simʿānī l-Anṭākī in
Arabic) explains it in his preface, written in 1085. He reports about the con-
quest of his hometown by the Seljuks under sultan Sulaimān b. Quṭulmiš in
the first three days of December 1084, of which he was witness. This date is a
historical fact; Michael informs us with great accuracy, being the most impor-

16 SynaxCP (1902: 278, 29–279, 19).

17 Kotter (1988: 471–500).
18 Cf. Petrynko (2016: 403 with n. 22–24).
19 Kotter (1988: 91–110).
20 John of Damascus, De hymno trisagio 26 (329, 13–15 Kotter).
21 Published for the first time by al-Bāšā (1912); it is not numbered within the bho (Biblio-
theca hagiographica orientalis), which had already appeared by 1910. The second edition
by al-Yāziǧī (1984) is not easily accessible and also has no critical edition; cf. Ambros (2019:
5–7; 11–12).
22 volk

tant source for this incident.22 On December 4th, Michael was—together with
many inhabitants of Antioch—driven out of the citadel, their place of refuge.
The whole way down he prayed to Barbara the martyr and to the second saint
of this day, to John the priest from Damascus with the byname ‘the man who
exudes gold’. As he arrived down from the citadel, the enormous crowd was
sitting on a meadow and soon got the information that Sulaimān will give free-
dom to all of them and that they can all return relieved to their homes.
One year later, that is in 1085, Michael recollects these events and wishes to
learn more about John of Damascus, but was quickly faced with limiting fac-
tors. Initially, he heard that no complete biography existed, neither in Greek
nor in Arabic.
Here I am citing the English translation by Rocío Daga Portillo:

I had heard some disconnected biographical news and I found some very
cut down written memories in a summary of biographies of the Fathers of
this time, in addition to some incomplete fragments. I gathered all of this,
omitting some of them, because I did not find these sections correspond-
ing to the original.23 In that way I have composed only one continuous
biography.24

The monk Michael thus claims to have written in 1085, in Arabic, the first com-
plete Life of John Damascene. There is, however, a severe obstacle hindering
the acceptance of this theory. For decades the oldest witness of the Greek
Life [bhg 884], depending on an Arabic source, raised serious doubts; it is the
lower writing on the palimpsest leaves 109r, 108vr, 110vr und 107vr of the codex
rescriptus Vindob. phil. gr. 158,25 containing title and the first nine chapters
of [bhg 884]. Of course this writing is not from the 10th century,26 but on
no account from 1085 or later: ‘My first impression of the script in the Vien-
naMS is that it is earlier than 1085.’27 We have to look for its origin in the years
around 1040 (oral information by Erich Lamberz [Munich], December 2019).

22 Kawerau (1977: 36 with n. 7).

23 Michael describes the aforementioned omitted sections in a more original manner: ‘I did
not find their branches corresponding with their roots.’
24 Rocío Daga Portillo (1996: 172,34–38).
25 The most comprehensive description of the whole codex is given by Grusková (2010: 54–
102).
26 This date unfortunately still appears in Hunger (1961: 261) and Halkin (1961: 396). Already
Lambros (1896: 566) more correctly spoke about the 11th century.
27 Nigel G. Wilson (Oxford) in an e-Mail to Jana Grusková (Vienna), mailed to me by Jana
Grusková on August 20, 2019.
the greek lives of st john damascene 23

Grusková’s attempt of a new date to the second half of the 11th century respec-
tively around the year 110028 has hitherto not succeeded. It is therefore possible
that Michael committed a fraud—benevolently spoken a pia fraus29—by writ-
ing only his preface and his epilogue and connecting them with the already
existing, but maybe not easily accessible Arabic Life. We should not condemn
him, because by doing this Michael probably rescued this text from threatened
oblivion. It will be the task of an Arabist to resolve by a stylistic and linguis-
tic examination, if Michael’s preface and epilogue and the nucleus of the Life
could have been written by two different authors. Peter Kawerau (1915–1988)
was not acquainted with this problem and believed in Michael’s authorship for
the preface and the whole Life. However, he makes an interesting observation:
The entire Life, not the preface, he says, is written in an Arabic characterized
by sentences long as tape-worms and totally un-Arabic constructions.30 In the
Vienna palimpsest not only the writing, but also the text itself makes the user
suspicious: being doubtless the oldest witness of [bhg 884], one would expect
on these leaves an excellent text close to the archetype. Unfortunately, this is
not the case. The Vienna palimpsest, bearing in the new edition the gramma-
logue ‘H’, is pretty far away from the group with the best text (grammalogues
A to F), and these manuscripts without exception are from the 14th or 15th
centuries; the plain, but beautifully written codex Athen. bn gr. 230 (14th cen-
tury), fol. 383r–409r, is the leader of this group (grammalogue ‘A’). Moreover,
the Vienna palimpsest is a solitary example in its details, without any close rel-
ative. Several lone variants of low quality, omissions and dittographies lead us
to the conclusion that the creation of [bhg 884] took place some, maybe many
years before the writing of the Vienna palimpsest.
A small table should illustrate the special cases:

Lone Variants of Ms. H (= Vienna Palimpsest)

pg 94, 432, 5 = 1, 11 new edition Τοῖς add. μὲν H

432, 22 = 2, 4 ἐκκλησιαστικοῦ] ἐκκλησιαστοῦ (sic!) H
432, 25 = 2, 5–6 διεσκεδασμένης] διασκεδαζομένης H
432, 44 = 2, 20 ἐκείνου1] ἐκεῖνον H
432, 46 = 2, 22 ἐρεύξεται] ἐρεύξατο H
433, 4 = 3, 2 κατὰ add. κατὰ H
433, 11 = 3, 7 καὶ om. H

28 Grusková (2010: 55; 83 and 90).

29 Hoeck (1951: 10).
30 Kawerau 1977: 36.
24 volk

433, 19 = 3, 14 ἐσχεδιασμένον] ἐνεσχεδιασμένον H

437, 9 = 5, 15 ἐν om. H
440, 18 = 7, 9 τὸν υἱὸν om. H
440, 39 = 8, 1 ποιούμενοι—440, 41 = 8,3 θάλασσαν om. H
440, 43 = 8, 5 προέθεντο] προσέθεντο H
441, 23 = 9, 3 τὴν add. τὴν H
444, 17 = 9, 32 καὶ] τοῖς H
444, 35 = 10, 1 θησαυροῦ expl. H

The Arabic Life, written or revived by the monk Michael in 1085 or a little
later, was almost immediately translated into Greek by an otherwise unknown
metropolitan Samuel of Adana; this translation soon got lost, but Ephrem
(Ep‘rem) Mcire (he passed away before 1103) could still use it for his Geor-
gian Life of John Damascene;31 details from Michael’s preface appear at the
colophon of this Life.32
These three contemporary clergymen (Michael, Samuel, and Ephrem) were
most possibly colleagues, working in the library of the monastery of St Symeon
near Antioch.33 Here we find a possible reason for the alleged authorship of
a patriarch John of Antioch for [bhg 884]. Already the title of the Vienna
palimpsest from ca. 1040, ‘Βίος τοῦ ὁσίου πατρὸς ἡμῶν Ἰωάννου τοῦ Δαμασκη-
νοῦ συγγραφεὶς παρὰ Ἰωάννου πατριάρχου Ἱεροσολύμων’, which clearly originates
from an earlier time than the activity of the three aforementioned clergy-
men, excludes the creation of [bhg 884] by an Antiochian author. There is no
relationship between Michael, Samuel, and Ephrem to the early 11th century
activity of patriarch John iii Polites of Antioch (996–1021); he is known as a
theological author,34 and Vassa Kontouma is convinced that he is the author
of [bhg 884].35 But the manuscripts with a patriarch John from Antioch in
their title are a minority and not of the best quality: Altogether there exist 71
manuscripts of [bhg 884]; 43 of them are bearing John from Jerusalem in their
title; 21 have John of Antioch; 4 do not mention an author’s name and a town
of origin; 3 have no title at all, because they are mutilated at their beginning.
The peculiarities of the manuscripts with an Antiochian title are not original;

31 Edition with Russian translation: Kekelidze (1914). From the unpublished works of my late
colleague Eva Ambros (1954–2018), I could use the provisional German translation, made
for her by Nino Doborjginidze (Tbilisi).
32 Kekelidze (1914: 173, 17–174, 7). This colophon in French translation by Flusin (1989: 51).
33 Cf. Flusin (1989: 54–55).
34 Beck (1959: 599).
35 Kontouma (2015: II, 1–26).
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
The Project Gutenberg eBook of Punctuation
personified
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
included with this ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using this
eBook.

Title: Punctuation personified

or, pointing made easy

Author: Mr. Stops

Release date: November 1, 2023 [eBook #72005]

Language: English

Original publication: London: John Harris, 1824

Credits: Bob Taylor, Tim Lindell and the Online Distributed

Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file
was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK

PUNCTUATION PERSONIFIED ***
 PUNCTUATION

Personified:

OR

POINTING MADE EASY.

BY

MR. STOPS.

LONDON:
JOHN HARRIS,
CORNER OF ST. PAUL’S CHURCH-YARD.
 LONDON:
PRINTED BY S. AND R. BENTLEY, DORSET STREET.
ROBERT’S first interview with MR.
STOPS.

Young Robert could read but he gabbled so fast:

And ran on with such speed, that all meaning he lost.
Till one Morning he met Mr. Stops by the way,
Who advis’d him to listen to what he should say.
Then entering the house, he a riddle repeated.
To shew, WITHOUT STOPS, how the ear may be cheated.
MR. STOPS reading to ROBERT and
his SISTER.

“Ev’ry lady in this land

“Has twenty nails upon each hand
“Five & twenty on hands & feet
“And this is true without deceit.”
But when the stops were plac’d aright,
The real sense was brought to light.
COUNSELLOR COMMA, marked thus ,

Here counsellor Comma the reader may view,

Who knows neither guile nor repentance;
A straight forward path he resolves to pursue
By dividing short parts of a sentence;
As “Charles can sing, whistle, leap, tumble, & run,”—
Yet so BRIEF is each pause, that he merely counts ONE.
ENSIGN SEMICOLON, marked thus ;

See, how Semicolon is strutting with pride;

Into two or more parts he’ll a sentence divide.
As “John’s a good scholar; but George is a better:
One wrote a fair copy; the other a letter.”
Without this gay ensign we little could do;
And when he appears we must pause & count TWO.
 A COLON, marked thus :

The colon consists of two dots, as you see:

And remains within sight whilst you count one, two, three:
Tis us’d where the sense is complete, tho but part
Of the sentence you’re reading, or learning by heart.
As “Gold is deceitful: it bribes to destroy.”
“Young James is admired: he’s a very good boy.”
A PERIOD or Full Stop,
marked thus .

The full-fac’d gentleman here shown

To all my friends, no doubt, is known:
In him the PERIOD we behold,
Who stands his ground whilst four are told;
And always ends a perfect sentence,
As “Crime is followed by repentance.”
THE INTERROGATIVE POINT ?

What little crooked man is this?

He’s call’d INTERROGATION, Miss:
He’s always asking this & that,
As “What’s your name? Whose dog is that?”
And for your answer, he will stay
While you, One, Two, Three, Four, can say.