Full Ebook of Cyrillona A Critical Study and Commentary 1St Edition Carl Griffin Online PDF All Chapter

Cyrillona A Critical Study and
Commentary 1st Edition Carl Griffin

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmeta.com/product/cyrillona-a-critical-study-and-commentary-1st-edition-
carl-griffin/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
Henry Blake Fuller A Critical Biography Constance M.

Griffin
https://ebookmeta.com/product/henry-blake-fuller-a-critical-
biography-constance-m-griffin/
Frank R Stockton A Critical Biography Martin I. J.

Griffin
https://ebookmeta.com/product/frank-r-stockton-a-critical-
biography-martin-i-j-griffin/
FIXED BOOKMARKS The Study Quran A New Translation and

Commentary Nasr
https://ebookmeta.com/product/fixed-bookmarks-the-study-quran-a-
new-translation-and-commentary-nasr/
Thomas Jeffersons Bible With Introduction and Critical

Commentary 1st Edition M. Andrew Holowchak
https://ebookmeta.com/product/thomas-jeffersons-bible-with-
introduction-and-critical-commentary-1st-edition-m-andrew-
holowchak/
Becoming a Critical Thinker (Macmillan Study Skills)
Egege
https://ebookmeta.com/product/becoming-a-critical-thinker-
macmillan-study-skills-egege/
Commentary on Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics Critical

Edition with Introduction and Translation Georgios
Pachymeres
https://ebookmeta.com/product/commentary-on-aristotle-
nicomachean-ethics-critical-edition-with-introduction-and-
translation-georgios-pachymeres/
Space and Place Exploring Critical Issues Exploring

Critical Issues 1st Edition Didem K■l■çk■ran Christina
Alegria Carl Haddrell
https://ebookmeta.com/product/space-and-place-exploring-critical-
issues-exploring-critical-issues-1st-edition-didem-kilickiran-
christina-alegria-carl-haddrell/
The Egerton Gospel Egerton Papyrus 2 Papyrus Köln VI

255 Introduction Critical Edition and Commentary Texts
and Editions for New Testament Study 13 Lorne R.
Zelyck
https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-egerton-gospel-egerton-
papyrus-2-papyrus-koln-vi-255-introduction-critical-edition-and-
commentary-texts-and-editions-for-new-testament-study-13-lorne-r-
zelyck/
Apocalypse Revisited a Critical Study on End Times 1st

Edition Melis Mulazimoglu Erkal
https://ebookmeta.com/product/apocalypse-revisited-a-critical-
study-on-end-times-1st-edition-melis-mulazimoglu-erkal/
Cyrillona
Gorgias Eastern Christian Studies
Series Editors
George Anton Kiraz
István Perczel
Lorenzo Perrone
Samuel Rubenson
Gorgias Eastern Christian Studies brings to the scholarly world the

underrepresented field of Eastern Christianity. This series consists
of monographs, edited collections, texts and translations of the
documents of Eastern Christianity, as well as studies of topics
relevant to the world of historic Orthodoxy and early Christianity.
Cyrillona
A Critical Study and Commentary
Carl Griffin
gp
2016
Gorgias Press LLC, 954 River Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA
www.gorgiaspress.com
Copyright © 2016 by Gorgias Press LLC
All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright

Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a
retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise without the
prior written permission of Gorgias Press LLC.
2016 ‫ܝ‬
1
ISBN 978-1-4632-0607-9 ISSN 1539-1507
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication

Data
Names: Griffin, Carl W., author.

Title: Cyrillona : a critical study and
commentary / Carl Griffin.
Description: Piscataway, NJ : Gorgias Press,
2016. | Series: Gorgias Eastern
Christian studies, ISSN 1539-1507 ; 46 |
Chiefly in English; with some
material in Syriac. | Includes
bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2016047417 | ISBN
9781463206079
Subjects: LCSH: Cyrillona, active 4th century.
| Christian poetry--History
and criticism. | Syriac poetry--History and
criticism.
Classification: LCC PJ5671.C975 Z84 2016 | DDC
892/.3--dc23
LC record available at
https://lccn.loc.gov/2016047417
Printed in the United States of America
Title of the Book
Version 1.0
Do not delete the following information about this document.
Document Template: Template book.dot.

Document Word Count: 12772
Document Page Count: 345
To Tani and Tasha

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents ..................................................................................... v

Acknowledgments .................................................................................. vii
List of Abbreviations .............................................................................. ix
Chapter One. Cyrillona: The Author and His Works ....................... 1
Introduction ..................................................................................... 1
Discovery and Publication ............................................................. 3
Author’s Name ................................................................................ 5
Corpus ............................................................................................... 8
Authenticity of On the Grain of Wheat.................................... 11
Identity of Cyrillona ...................................................................... 18

An Anonymous Homily on Pentecost ................................. 17
The Cyrillona-Absamya Hypothesis ..................................... 19
Date of Writing .............................................................................. 31

The Cyrillona-Qiyore Hypothesis ......................................... 28
Place of Writing ............................................................................. 47

Dating Scourges .......................................................................... 33
About This Study...........................................................................49

Chapter Two. On the Institution of the Eucharist ........................... 51
Introduction ................................................................................... 51
Form and Genre ............................................................................ 56
Analysis and Commentary ........................................................... 59
I. Exegesis of the Eucharistic Symbols (1–156) ................. 60
II. Narration of the Institution (157–353) ........................... 70
III. Dominical Discourse on the Eucharist (354–
576) ................................................................................... 83
Chapter Three. On the Washing of the Feet ..................................... 97
Introduction ................................................................................... 97
Form and Genre ..........................................................................101
Analysis and Commentary .........................................................106
I. The Poet’s Wonder (1–16) ...............................................106
II. Dialogue with the Prophets (17–58) .............................110
III. Jesus and Judas (59–86) .................................................114
IV. Jesus and Simon Peter (87–132)...................................117
V. The Great Commission (133–52) ..................................122
v
vi CYRILLONA
Chapter Four. On the Pasch of Our Lord .......................................127

Introduction .................................................................................127
Form and Genre ..........................................................................132
I. Prologue (1–18)..................................................................134
II. The Last Discourse (19–174) .........................................136
III. First Excursus: On the Reception of the Holy
Spirit (175–202).............................................................150
IV. Second Excursus: On the Wheat and the Vine
(203–366) .......................................................................155
V. Third Excursus: The Power of the Word (367–
88) ...................................................................................173
VI. The High Priestly Prayer and Final
Commission (389–440)................................................175
Chapter Five. On the Scourges ..........................................................179
Introduction .................................................................................179
Form and Genre ..........................................................................185
I. Invocation (1–26) ..............................................................187
II. Exhortation (27–154) ......................................................191
III. Petitions (155–689) ........................................................199
Chapter Six. On Zacchaeus ................................................................231
Introduction .................................................................................231
Form and Genre ..........................................................................236
I. The Evil One and Zacchaeus (1–16) ..............................240
II. Fall and Redemption (17–56) .........................................243
III. Christ, the Ocean of Mercies (57–96) .........................251
IV. Zacchaeus and the Penitent (97–112) .........................254
Epilogue .................................................................................................257
Appendix Cyrillona, the Bible, and Dating ......................................263
Bibliography of Works Cited ..............................................................273
Citation Index of Scripture .................................................................317
Citation Index of Ancient Authors and Works ...............................325
Subject Index.........................................................................................335
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
My warmest thanks to Sidney H. Griffith for his wisdom and

mentorship, and to Kristian S. Heal for his many contributions to
my research and inexhaustible collegiality. My thanks also to
Monica Blanchard, Tani Griffin, Mikael Oez, David G. K. Taylor,
Janet Timbie, and two superlative anonymous peer reviewers for
their respective contributions. The research and writing of this
book, and the dissertation on which it is based, was made possible
through the support of my academic unit at Brigham Young
University, the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship,
and the generosity of three past executive directors: M. Gerald
Bradford, Noel B. Reynolds, and Andrew C. Skinner.
vii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
GENERAL
ANF The Ante-Nicene Fathers (ed. Roberts and Donaldson)
BHG Bibliotheca Hagiographica Graeca
C Codex Curetonianus
CCSL Corpus Christianorum Series Latina
CPG Clavis Patrum Graecorum
CSCO Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium
CSEL Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum
Diat. Diatessaron
MT Masoretic Text
OS Old Syriac
Pesh. Peshitta
PG Patrologia Graeca
S Codex Palimpsestus Sinaiticus
Syr. Syriac
Targ. Targum
TS Thesaurus Syriacus (ed. Payne Smith)
WORKS OF CYRILLONA
Euch. On the Institution of the Eucharist
Wash. On the Washing of the Feet
Pasch On the Pasch of Our Lord
Scourges On the Scourges
Zacch. On Zacchaeus
ix
x CYRILLONA
WORKS OF EPHREM THE SYRIAN

Arm. Armenian Hymns (ed. Mariès and Mercier, Hymnes
conservées en version arménienne)
Azym. Hymns on the Unleavened Bread (ed. Beck, Paschahymnen)
Cruc. Hymns on the Crucifixion (ed. Beck, Paschahymnen)
Diat. Commentary on the Diatessaron (ed. Leloir, Commentaire de
l’Évangile, 1963 and 1990)
Dom. Nost. Sermon on Our Lord (ed. Beck, Sermo de Domino Nostro)
Eccl. Hymns on the Church (ed. Beck, Hymnen de Ecclesia)
Epiph. Hymns on Epiphany (ed. Beck, Hymnen de Nativitate)
HFid. Hymns on Faith (ed. Beck, Hymnen de Fide)
Haer. Hymns against Heresies (ed. Beck, Hymnen contra Haereses)
Ieiun. Hymns on the Fast (ed. Beck, Hymnen de Ieiunio)
Nat. Hymns on the Nativity (ed. Beck, Hymnen de Nativitate)
Nic. Hymns on Nicomedia (ed. Renoux, Mēmrē sur Nicomédie)
Nis. Hymns on Nisibis (ed. Beck, Carmina Nisibena, 1961 and
1963)
Par. Hymns on Paradise (ed. Beck, Hymnen de Paradiso und
Contra Julianum)
Pub. Letter to Publius (ed. Brock, “Ephrem’s Letter to
Publius”)
Res. Hymns on the Resurrection (ed. Beck, Paschahymnen)
Serm. Sermones (ed. Beck, Sermones I-IV)
Virg. Hymns on Virginity (ed. Beck, Hymnen de Virginitate)
OTHER SYRIAC TEXTS

Dem. Aphrahat, Demonstrations (ed. Parisot, Aphraatis)
Heb. Sanc. Ps. Ephrem, Sermons on Holy Week (ed. Beck, Sermones
in Hebdomadam Sanctam)
Mens. Ps. Ephrem, Sermons on the Blessing of the Table (ed.
Mariès, Froman and Graffin, “Mimré de Saint
Éphrem”)
Sogh. Soghyatha (ed. Brock, Soghyatha mgabyatha)
Wheat On the Grain of Wheat (ed. Griffin, “Cyrillona”)
CHAPTER ONE
CYRILLONA: THE AUTHOR AND HIS
WORKS
INTRODUCTION
Syriac Christianity has been described as “essentially Semitic in its
outlook and thought patterns.” 1 Like authors of the Hebrew Bible,
early Syriac writers favored teaching theology through poetry,
extravagant in symbolism and lavish in trope, and a stark contrast
to the systematic and philosophical prose of the Greek East and
Latin West. Because of this and other singular features, early Syriac
Christianity has become of ever-increasing interest to church
historians.
It is unfortunate that comparatively little early Syriac literature
has been preserved. Most Syriac literature postdates the Council of
Chalcedon (451), when theological controversy precipitated the
split of the Syriac church into eastern and western communions,
each of which developed its own literary tradition. Cyrillona and his
works are in the same lamentable position as so much of early
Syriac literature, which Lucas Van Rompay has well described:
Writings antedating the split [of the East and West Syrian
churches, following Chalcedon,] and representing the common
heritage of all Syrian Christians have in part been incorporated
into one or both of the two later traditions. Others just happen
to have been preserved, totally cut off from their original
context, without any indication of when and where they
originated. Many more have simply disappeared. And yet, it is
1Brock, “From Antagonism to Assimilation,” 17; see also Brock,

Luminous Eye, 14–15.
1
2 CYRILLONA
this pre-fifth-century stage of Syriac culture, which is

sometimes seen as “essentially semitic in its outlook and
thought patterns” and less hellenized, which has such a strong
appeal today. Judging by the titles, more than half of the
papers read at the present symposium deal with this period.
There is no common denominator for this early literature: it
consists of individual authors and anonymous works, each
with its own characteristics, with very few connections
between them. Much of this period soon must have fallen into
oblivion. 2
Cyrillona is precisely one of these valuable early authors, all but
anonymous, whose surviving works are preserved by happenstance,
severed from their original context, with evident merits but
uncertain historical, literary, and theological connections.
Cyrillona has been celebrated as one of the foremost early
Syriac poets since almost the moment of his discovery by Western
scholars in the mid-19th century. An important factor in
establishing his high reputation was the publication of a translation
of his works by the eminent German semitist Gustav Bickell in the
popular series, Bibliothek der Kirchenväter. 3 Bickell lavished upon
Cyrillona the highest of praise: “I consider him the most important
Syriac poet after Ephrem.” 4
In 1912 a reviser of Bickell’s translation, Simon
Landersdorfer, would note Bickell’s praise, and while not
disagreeing, was careful to specify that this was Bickell’s opinion. 5
Nevertheless, Bickell’s superlative praise influenced many scholars
of his generation, who at times repeated his declaration, in
2 Van Rompay, “Past and Present Perceptions,” par. 9. The

symposium he refers to, and the venue for his address, was the third
Syriac Symposium, Notre Dame, 1999.
3 Bickell, Ausgewählte Gedichte, 9–63.
4 Ibid., 14; translation mine, as are all translations of secondary
literature throughout.
5 Landersdorfer, Ausgewählte Schriften, 1, 8. Landersdorfer made only
minimal changes to Bickell’s translation; in the following study I rarely

find cause to cite his revision as an independent work.
1. THE AUTHOR AND HIS WORKS 3
substance or even verbatim, at times with attribution to Bickell or

simply as their own opinion. 6 Clearly many of these writers had no
direct acquaintance with Cyrillona, but Syriac scholars have
repeatedly affirmed his importance. Aphram Barsoum ranked
Cyrillona among the highest tier of Syriac poets, “famous for their
illuminating introductions, clear expression and exquisite style,”
and found him in no way inferior to his predecessors. 7 Murray
regards him as the last great theological poet before Syriac poetry
lapsed into “a monotonous and facile fluency which only a few
writers of genius will transcend.” 8
DISCOVERY AND PUBLICATION

The first publication of a text now attributed to Cyrillona appeared
in fact under the name of Isaac of Antioch, a long excerpt from On
the Institution of the Eucharist, published by Overbeck in 1865. 9 While
6 E.g., Bardenhewer: “Bickell declared the author the most

important Syriac poet after Ephrem” (Geschichte, 4:397); “Bickell described
the author as the most important Syriac poet after Ephrem” (Patrologie,
342); Danglard: “Cyrillona, whom the translator would consider the most
important Syriac poet after St. Ephrem …” (“Courrier allemand,” 265);
Hurter: “Moreover, the first of these [per Bickell] is the deacon Cyrillona;
per the same critic, he is the foremost poet after St. Ephrem” (Nomenclator,
1:202–3); Kurtz: “Next to [Ephrem] stands Cyrillona” (Lehrbuch der
Kirchengeschichte, 296); Leitner: “Cyrillona, the most important Syriac poet
after Ephrem …” (Gottesdienstliche Volkgesang, 102); Nirschl: “Cyrillona
may be looked up to as the most important Syriac poet after Ephrem”
(Lehrbuch, 277); Rump: “Cyrillona, whom the translator considers as the
most important Syriac poet after Ephrem …” (“Neuere Publicationen,”
138); Streber: “Of the six surviving hymns by this poet, who approaches
Ephrem in grandeur and power …” (“Cyrillonas,” 1282).
7 Barsoum, Scattered Pearls, 36, 239–40.
8 Murray, Symbols, 340.
9 Overbeck, Opera selecta, 379–81 (=Euch. 95–238). I reference all
works of Cyrillona according to the titles and title abbreviations I have

assigned them. See the Table of Abbreviations above, and also the table
of manuscript titles and incipits on pp. 8–9 below. In all cases my
4 CYRILLONA
the title of this text is given in the manuscript as simply ‫ܕܥܠ‬

‫ܨܠܝܒܘܬܐ‬, without any authorial attribution, 10 it is preceded there
by twelve homilies which are explicitly attributed to Isaac (‫ܕܡܪܝ‬
‫ ܐܝܣܚܩ ܛܘܒܢܐ‬or simply ‫)ܕܡܪܝ ܐܝܣܚܩ‬. Overbeck made an
understandable assumption concerning its authorship, one later
made as well by Wright in his catalog. 11
In 1869 Gustav Bickell announced that there was in London a
manuscript containing “a few poems” by a “heretofore entirely
10F
unknown Cyrillona,” one of which was a homily on the invasion of

the Huns. 12 He speculated that this author was perhaps identical
with Absamya, a nephew of Ephrem who was reported to have
also composed “hymns and sermons on the invasion of the
Huns.” 13 Bickell further announced his intention to publish these
poems together with those of Isaac of Antioch. 14
In 1871 Bickell published a second notice concerning “three
hymns of Cyrillona … transcribed by me,” from which he provided
some short extracts in Latin translation of “some items pertaining
to historical matters.” 15 He again suggested the identity of Cyrillona
citations from Cyrillona, in Syriac or English translation, are taken from

my own bilingual edition of his works (Griffin, Works of Cyrillona).
10 Overbeck gives the title as ‫ܡܢ ܡܐܡܪܐ ܕܥܠ ܨܠܝܒܘܬܐ ܕܡܪܝ‬
‫“( ܐܝܣܚܩ‬From a mimro On the Crucifixion by Mar Isaac”), but this is an

editorial expansion. He does, however, correctly observe of the heading to
this section, ‫ܕܡܪܝ ܒܠܝ‬: “I regard this as referring to the meter rather than to
the source, i.e., in the meter of Mar Balai (‫( ”)ܒܢܝܫܐ ܕܡܪܝ ܒܠܝ‬Overbeck,
Opera selecta, ix).
11 Wright, Catalogue, 2:670. Wright, uncharacteristically, fails to note
Overbeck’s publication, so this may well represent his independent

judgment. Bickell does note Overbeck and his attribution of it to Isaac,
but without further comment (Bickell, Ausgewählte Gedichte, 40n1).
12 I.e., Scourges.
13 See Assemani, Bibliotheca, 1:169–70, 401.
14 Bickell, “Syrisches für deutsche Theologen,” 150.
15 Bickell, Conspectus, 21, 34–36. The three hymns he references are
Pasch, Scourges, and Zacch. The extracts are of Scourges 1–26, 95–106, 194–
201, 245–339, and 570–633, and of Zacch. 21–46 and 53–56. While the
with Absamya, and in another place noted that Cyrillona was an

early witness to Bel and the Dragon in the Syriac tradition. 16
In 1872 Bickell published his German prose translation of six
homilies which he attributed to Cyrillona, 17 and in 1874 he
published an experimental retranslation into verse of two
passages. 18 In 1873 he also published an edition of the Syriac
texts, 19 with corrections following some years later, in 1881. 20
Bickell’s final, more modest, mention of our author was in his great
work on Hebrew poetics, where he notes in passing that Cyrillona
preferred 4+4 meter. 21
AUTHOR’S NAME
The manuscript containing the sole surviving copy of these texts is
BL Add. 14,591, a vellum codex of 151 folios written in a fine
Estrangela hand which Wright dates to the end of the sixth
century. 22 It contains a number of homilies and hymns by Isaac of
Antioch, and in addition: Balai’s hymns on the dedication of the
church at Qenneshrin and on the bishop Acacius; a homily on the
Crucifixion by Peter of Callinicus; five anonymous texts; and two
homilies ascribed, notes Wright, “to a writer named ‫ܡܪܝ ܩܘܪܠܘܟܐ‬
extracts from Scourges are, as Bickell indicates, historical in character, the

passages from Zacch. are on Mary.
16 Bickell, Conspectus, 7n7 (Bel) and 21 (Absamya). Bickell does not
specify such, but the allusion to Bel and the Dragon he references must be
that found in Scourges 54 (cf. Bel 27).
17 Bickell, Ausgewählte Gedichte, 9–63.
18 Bickell, Ausgewählte Schriften, 410–11, 414–21.
19 Bickell, “Gedichte,” 566–98.
20 Bickell, “Berichtigungen.”
21 Bickell, Carmina, 231. Bickell’s observations about Cyrillona and
Hebrew poetry were also repeated (inaccurately) by Maas (“Scripture

Poetry,” 58).
22 Wright, Catalogue, 2:669. Overbeck also dates it to the sixth
century (Opera selecta, xx). For a full description of the ms. see Wright,
Catalogue, 2:669–73.
6 CYRILLONA
[Mar Qurlokha] or ‫[ ܩܘܪܝܠܘܟܐ‬Qurilokha],” the second followed by

an associated soghitha (‫)ܣܘܓܝܬܐ ܕܝܠܗ ܕܡܐܡܪܐ‬. 23
There is no known historical author named Qurlokha or
2F
Qurilokha, and the possible derivation of such a name is unclear.

In his initial notice of these works, Bickell names the author as
“Cyrillonas” without further explanation. 24 Wright in his catalog,
referencing Bickell, further explains: “The name seems distinctly
written, but it may possibly be a mistake for ‫ܩܘܪܝܠܘܢܐ‬, a Syriac
diminutive from Cyrillus, as ‫ ܣܪܓܘܢܐ‬and ‫ ܐܘܣܒܘܢܐ‬from Sergius
and Eusebius.” 25 Martin likewise says the author is “Kourlouca, for
which one should perhaps read Cyrillona,” again referencing
Bickell. 26 In his edition of the Syriac text Bickell renders the
problematic letter as nun, noting simply that it does indeed
“appear” to be a kaph but not explaining the basis of his
emendation. 27 It is only in 1881, as a parenthetical note to his
textual corrections, that Bickell offers any further qualification: “At
both places where the name of the poet appears in the rubricized
titles, it looks almost like ‫ܩܘܪܝܠܘܟܐ‬. Such a Nun, so very similar to
a Kaf, is however regularly found in the rubrics of this
manuscript.” 2827F
23 Wright, Catalogue, 2:670.

24 Bickell, “Syrisches für deutsche Theologen,” 150. This is a
Latinization of Cyrillona.
25 Wright, Catalogue, 2:670n. Bardenhewer affirms too, “In the
manuscript it does indeed say in both places ‘Cyrilloka,’ ‫ קורלוכא‬instead of

‫( ”קורלונא‬Geschichte, 4:395n1).
26 Martin, Saint-Pierre, 22, citing Pasch 119–22 and referencing Bickell,
Conspectus, 7, 21, 34–36. His reading of the name certainly represents an

independent judgment, since Martin cites both Pasch and Wash. 119–24
directly from the manuscript (the latter as a work of Isaac) and shows no
awareness of Bickell’s edition (Martin, Saint-Pierre, 21–22).
27 Bickell, “Gedichte,” 576n3, 583n1.
28 Bickell, “Berichtigungen,” 531n1. Bickell would repeat this
argument in 1874: “The name Cyrillona is the correct one, as has emerged
from repeated comparison within the manuscript, although the Nun
seems very similar to a Kaf; for in the rubrics of this manuscript is
I cannot see for myself any tendency in the manuscript to

write kaph and nun alike, either in text or rubrics. However, it is the
unfortunate case that both instances of our author’s name are
written badly:
fol. 62r, col. 1, ln. 2 fol. 72r, col. 1, ln. 26
In both examples we see that the character in question has an

almost hook-like thickening at the top of the down stroke that may
be suggestive of kaph; but based on my own autoptic examination
of the manuscript and its rubrics, I find that the character is
certainly a nun. 29 We see, for example, that the rough thickening at
the top of the stroke is also evident in a word adjacent to the
second instance, much less exaggerated, but in both cases the same
letter nun.
fol. 72r, col. 1, ln. 25
The inclusion/exclusion of the yudh in ‫ܩܘܪܝܠܘܢܐ‬/‫ ܩܘܪܠܘܢܐ‬is a

discrepancy that no one has addressed. Nor has anyone identified
any other occurrence of the name Cyrillona in extant literature, as
far as I can determine, 30 though the above-cited “diminutive thesis”
29F
regularly found the same form of the Nun” (Bickell, Ausgewählte Schriften,
410).
29 I emend here my own, previous position (Griffin, “Cyrillona,” 8–
9).
30 Perles remarks, “The name Cyril and Cyrillona was very
widespread amid the Greeks and Syrians,” but he adduces our Cyrillona as
the only example of the latter (“Jüdisch-byzantinische Beziehungen,”
582–83). As Bardenhewer says, “To literary-historical written sources,
8 CYRILLONA
makes excellent sense. 31 While the evidence is imperfect, no better

alternative presents itself. So I take here the most conservative and
arguable course and continue to call our author Cyrillona.
CORPUS
Bickell first established the canon of Cyrillona’s writings, as
follows:
BL Add. Syriac title Incipit English title Abbv.
14,591
fols.
54r–59r ‫ܡܐܡܪܐ ܕܥܠ‬ ‫ܡܠܠ ܐܡܪܐ‬ On the Euch.
‫ܨܠܝܒܘܬܐ‬ ‫ ܥܡ‬.‫ܕܫܪܪܐ‬
̈ Institution of the
‫ܐܟܘܠܘܗܝ‬ Eucharist
.‫ܒܚܕܘܬܐ‬
59v–61v ‫ܣܘܓܝܬܐ ܕܝܠܗ‬ ‫ܠܬܪܥܣܪܬܗ ܡܪܢ‬ On the Washing Wash.
‫ܕܡܐܡܪܐ‬ ‫ܘܐܬܐ‬
̣ .‫ܕܒܪ‬̣ of the Feet
‫ܕܢܫܝܓ‬ ̣ ‫ܠܒܝܬܐ‬
.‫ܠܗܘܢ‬
62r–67r ‫ܡܐܡܪܐ ܕܥܠ‬ ‫ܟܕ ̇ܩܪܐ ܐܢܐ‬ On the Pasch of Pasch
‫ܦܨܚܐ ܕܡܪܢ ܕܡܪܝ‬ ‫ ̈ܚܕܬܬܐ‬.‫ܒܚܕܬܐ‬ ̇ Our Lord
‫ܩܘܪܠܘܟܐ‬ ̇.‫ܢܒܥܝ ܠܝ ܡܢܗ‬ ̈
72r–77v ‫ܡܕ̈ܪܫܐ ܕܥܠ‬ ̈
.‫ܠܚܒܝܒܝܟ‬ ‫ܐܩܪܐ‬ On the Scourges Scourges
‫ܩܡܨܐ ܘܥܠ‬ .‫ܕܗܢܘܢ ܢܦܝܣܘܢܟ‬ ̣
‫ ܘܥܠ‬.‫ܡܪܕܘܬܐ‬
̈
.‫ܕܗܘܢܝܐ‬ ‫ܩܪܒܐ‬
‫ܕܩܘܪܝܠܘܢܐ‬
77v–79r ‫ܣܘܓܝܬܐ ܕܝܠܗ‬ ‫ܙܝܢ ܚܪܡܐ ܚܪܒܗ‬ On Zacchaeus Zacch.
‫ܕܡܐܡܪܐ‬ ‫ ܘܣܝܦܗ‬.‫ܥܠܝܢ‬
.‫ܡܚܘܐ ܕܢܕܚܠܢ‬
indeed, to the entire later literature of the Syriac tongue, the name
Cyrillona is completely foreign” (Geschichte, 4:397).
31 Κύριλλος is a diminutive already (of Κύρος), making ‫ ܩܘܪܝܠܘܢܐ‬a
double-diminutive from both Greek and Syriac. But that likely was
unknown to namers or named. There is, in fact, some evidence for a
cultural practice of semitizing Greek names with the semitic diminutive in
this period, at least in Syrian monasteries (see Canivet, Monachisme syrien,
252). In addition to ‫ ܣܪܓܘܢܐ‬and ‫ܐܘܣܒܘܢܐ‬, another notable example
from this same period is ‫ܦܘܠܘܢܐ‬, a heretical disciple of Ephrem (see
Brock, Hymns on Paradise, 20, on Gennadius’s description; Budge, Book of
Governors, 2:354n4, on the Paulonians).
79r–83r ‫ܡܐܡܪܐ ܕܥܠ‬ ‫ܚܛܬܐ ܢܦܠܐ‬ On the Grain of Wheat

‫ܚܛܬܐ‬ ‫ ܪܚܫܐ‬.‫ܒܚܛܘܛܐ‬ Wheat
.‫ܘܢܒܥܐ ܫܠܝܐܝܬ‬
As previously noted, BL Add. 14,591 contains three texts attributed

to Cyrillona, two homilies being directly attributed to him and the
second having an associated soghitha. In their manuscript order,
they are On the Pasch of Our Lord (Pasch), On the Scourges (Scourges),
and On Zacchaeus (Zacch.). These are the “three poems” Bickell
references in his 1871 Conspectus, 32 and here as in his other work he
simply accepts, without defense or argument, that all three
proceeded from the same pen. This has been the judgment of all
subsequent scholars, too, based both on attribution and stylistic
affinity, and is a judgment which I also accept. While Zacch. does
exhibit some stylistic differences from the other two poems, the
correspondences seem more compelling, and I agree with
Cerbelaud that “one should not hasten to modify the attribution of
this text.” 33
However, in 1872 Bickell published six homilies which he
ascribed to Cyrillona. Whence the additional three? Following the
manuscript order, the first of these is a homily titled On the
Crucifixion (‫)ܕܥܠ ܨܠܝܒܘܬܐ‬. Because it does not discuss the
Crucifixion at all, I follow Cerbelaud in titling it more accurately,
On the Institution of the Eucharist (Euch.). 34 In the manuscript it
follows a series of homilies by Isaac of Antioch and, as noted
3F
previously, a portion was published by Overbeck as a work of

Isaac. 35 While it is not included in any of the standard catalogs or
34F
32 Bickell, Conspectus, 21.

33 Cerbelaud, Agneau, [Intro.] 21. Since Cerbelaud’s introduction as
well as his translation are paginated with Arabic numerals, I specify
throughout when I am referencing his introduction.
34 See Cerbelaud, Agneau, [Intro.] 15. Cerbelaud gives a double title
to each text, a descriptive title followed by the manuscript title in

parentheses. Other translators have likewise adopted descriptive titles for
these texts.
35 Overbeck, Opera selecta, 379–81.
10 CYRILLONA
handlists of Isaac’s works, 36 Bou Mansour apparently considers the

first section of this homily (fols. 54r–55v) to be a genuine work of
Isaac. 37 Bou Mansour seems unaware of Overbeck’s publication
and does not indicate why he regards only the first section as by
Isaac. There can be no doubt about the literary unity of the entire
work. He also does not engage or even acknowledge the issue that
it has long been attributed to Cyrillona. In the absence of specific
argument, there is no reason to accept a priori Bou Mansour’s
suggestion.
Bickell was an editor and translator of Isaac, and in fact was
editing and translating both Isaac and Cyrillona at the same time.
He discovered Cyrillona through his study of BL Add. 14,591, an
important manuscript witness to Isaac, and presumably his
comparative reading of Euch. against the works attributed to Isaac
and Cyrillona led him to conclude that this was in fact a work of
Cyrillona. 38 But all we have from Bickell is the simple explanation,
“Cyrillona is not named as the author [of Euch.], but beyond doubt
this homily belongs with the one following [i.e., Pasch], which is
36 See Assemani, Bibliotheca, 1:207–34; Bickell, Opera omnia, iv–vii;

Brock, “Published Verse Homilies”; Mathews, “Bibliographical Clavis.”
37 Bou Mansour, “Distinction des écrits,” 2n5, 16. For more on his
criteria for determining authenticity, see Bou Mansour, “Clé pour la

distinction.”
38 There is also the possibility that Wright first suggested to Bickell
that both Euch. and its associated soghitha (Wash.) were the work of
Cyrillona. We know that the two scholars corresponded about Euch., since
Wright provided Bickell with the transcription of Euch. 239–576 for his
1873 edition (see Bickell, “Gedichte,” 573n1), but there is also a slightly
earlier connection. Bickell’s translation of Cyrillona, which included these
two works, was published in 1872. In the 1872 index to his catalog, under
“Isaac,” Wright also references Euch. and Wash., and asks parenthetically,
“(by Cyrillonas?)” (Catalogue, 3:1289). Wright did not raise this question in
the catalog entry (published in 1871), where these works are attributed to
Isaac (ibid, 2:669–273), but only in his index. So was this Wright’s own
conjecture, of which Bickell was made aware, or was it Bickell who
suggested Cyrillona’s authorship to Wright?
explicitly attributed to him.” 39 This has been the unanimous

opinion of subsequent scholars as well.
Immediately following Euch. in the manuscript is a soghitha
associated with it by title (‫ )ܣܘܓܝܬܐ ܕܝܠܗ ܕܡܐܡܪܐ‬on the
washing of the disciples’ feet at the Last Supper (On the Washing of
the Feet [Wash.]). The thematic and stylistic affinity which this shares
with Euch. is pronounced and all scholars to date have affirmed
their common authorship.
Authenticity of On the Grain of Wheat

It is the last of the six homilies which Bickell attributes to Cyrillona
that is of debatable authorship. An anonymous homily On the Grain
of Wheat (Wheat) follows Zacch. in the manuscript, and is itself
followed by two more anonymous homilies, one on the Crucifixion
and the other on perfection. 40 These last two homilies Bickell
believed to be by Isaac. 41 Wheat, however, he published as a work
of Cyrillona, though he acknowledged that its authorship was less
certain than for the other five texts.
We regard the unnamed author as Cyrillona, who also in the
preceding poem spoke in a similar way about wheat, but do
not deny that the same certainty does not exist here as for the
other three anonymous poems which we have ascribed to
Cyrillona. It is not altogether impossible that Isaac of Antioch
may have written it. We include it in our collection
nonetheless, not only to offer in absolute completeness the
poems of Cyrillona, but also because it contains many
important passages concerning the most holy sacrament of the
Eucharist. 42
39 Bickell, Ausgewählte Gedichte, 37n1.

40 A provisional critical edition and English translation of Wheat may
be found in Griffin, “Cyrillona,” 533–59, and was further discussed in
Griffin, “‘Queen of Grains.’”
41 Bickell, Opera omnia, nos. 89 and 112; likewise, Brock, “Published
Verse Homilies,” nos. 270 and 331, and Mathews, “Bibliographical

Clavis,” nos. 102 and 130.
42 Bickell, Ausgewählte Gedichte, 56.
12 CYRILLONA
So Bickell knew well enough that Wheat was at best just possibly
Cyrillonan, but nevertheless found in its (practically nonexistent)
eucharistic theology warrant to include it in the collection. It is
noteworthy that Bickell was also an editor and translator of Isaac of
Antioch. 43 He says here of Wheat, “It is not altogether impossible
that Isaac of Antioch may have written it,” 44 which seems to me
Teutonic understatement. I suspect he believed Isaac was, in fact,
much more than not impossibly the author or he would not have
mooted it. Might he even have edited this text originally as a work
of Isaac together with the two other Isaac texts he took from this
manuscript? 45
Bickell speaks both here and elsewhere about the importance
of Cyrillona as a witness to Roman Catholic teaching, and
specifically Catholic eucharistic theology. 46 Bickell was an
enthusiastic convert to Roman Catholicism and certain apologetic
biases in his work are transparent. 47 Given his exuberant claim that
43 Bickell, Opera omnia (edition), and Ausgewählte Gedichte, 109–89

(translation).
45 De vigiliis Antiochenis et de eo, quod bonum est confiteri Domino, and
Contra eos, qui ad hariolos vadunt (Bickell, Opera omnia, 1:294–306 and 2:204–
20).
46 “But [Cyrillona] becomes even more important for us due to the
sure witness which he provides in the few pages of his poems for so many
of the Catholic teachings contested by the Reformers; namely, for the
holy sacrifice of the Mass, for the true presence of Christ in the Holy
Eucharist, for the sinlessness of the Holy Virgin, the invocation of the
martyrs and the veneration of their relics” (Bickell, Ausgewählte Gedichte,
14). This observation was promoted by some other subsequent Roman
Catholic authors (e.g., Hurter, Nomenclator, 1:202–3; Nirschl, Lehrbuch,
2:277–79), though actual acquaintance with the texts is not always in
evidence, so that, for example, Cyrillona is numbered among authors of
“poems about the Virgin Mary” (Kolb, Wegweiser, 202).
47 This was noted by a contemporary reviewer (Methodist Quarterly
Review 54 [1872]: 666–67) and also a more recent scholar, who pointedly
suggests that apologetic bias undermined Bickell’s judgment (Lohse,
“Fußwaschung,” 1:45).
Cyrillona was “the most important Syriac poet after Ephrem,” 48

and the early date Cyrillonan authorship would imply for Wheat,
Bickell would have been strongly tempted to include it in the
corpus to enhance its perceived apologetic value.
The only textual rationale Bickell offers for his attribution is
that Cyrillona “also in the preceding poem [Pasch] spoke in a similar
way about wheat.” 49 Vona, accepting this attribution, published a
list of correlations between Pasch and Wheat. 50 Some of these
parallels 51 appear to be of little substance, and in the case of the
most striking, wheat bearing up its fruit upon its head, the referents
in either case are completely different. 52 Still, it can be said that
both poems appear to draw on some common fond of nature
imagery for the grain of wheat.
But these two texts are much more striking, upon closer
comparison, for their typological dissimilarity than their modest
verbal similarity. Wheat is principally an agricultural paean to the
“queen of grains” and “most beloved of seeds,” 53 a text that is
strikingly non-religious in contrast with Cyrillona’s genuine works.
It is only toward the end of Wheat that the author begins to develop
religious typology from the symbol of the grain of wheat,
principally in connection with the resurrection 54—though not the
resurrection of Christ, as in Pasch, but the hope of the resurrection

49 Ibid., 56.
50 See Vona, Carmi, 33. For a parallel comparison of the texts from
Vona’s list, see Griffin, “Cyrillona,” 16–17.

51 I reference “parallels” here conventionally but with caution, since
a bare “parallel” is rarely treated as the opaque signifier that it certainly is

(see classically, Sandmel, “Parallelomania”). I savor the anecdote, perhaps
apocryphal, that Erwin R. Goodenough used to remind his students
regularly and drily that a parallel is two lines that meet at a point only in
infinity.
52 Pasch 251–54; Wheat 38, 43–48, 59–66. See pp. 159–60 below.
53 Wheat 121, 129.
54 See Wheat 244–77.
14 CYRILLONA
of the just. 55 Likewise in Wheat, the grain of wheat is not depicted

as a type of Christ or the Eucharist, except perhaps in passing, 56
whereas this is central to Pasch’s symbolism. 57 And while Wheat
appears to associate (awkwardly) the sprouting of the seed with the
piercing of Jesus’s side upon the cross, 58 Pasch associates the
piercing with the harvesting of the grape vine. 59
There is, then, substantial ground for disagreement with
Bickell’s assertion that the two poems speak “in a similar way about
wheat.” 60 The typological employment of any common elements
they share is quite different. In fact, the few commonalities that
might connect them, in the end, witness against a shared author.
“The employment of these elements [parallel to Pasch in Wheat] is
characterized by a heaviness and clumsiness which pervades the
entirety of the text. One hardly imagines Cyrillona utilizing so
poorly one of his own texts.” 61
These differences are not just confined to typology or the use
of these common elements, but also are manifest in Wheat’s verbal
and rhetorical style generally. Notes Cerbelaud, “Its style is clearly
different from that of the other texts. The development of allegory
is artificial, and its systematic character leads to a certain
leadenness.” 62 Indeed, Wheat is a prolix and lumbering
composition, wanting the lively and spare style of Cyrillona’s
genuine works. The Ephremian style of Cyrillona, rich with a
symbolic theology of antithesis and paradox, is absent from Wheat
as well. Some of the specific stylistic incongruities in Wheat that
may be noted are the use of ethical datives for meter; 63 use of
55 This connection with the resurrection of the dead is almost

certainly due to Wheat’s sources; see below.
57 See Pasch 259–86.
61 Cerbelaud, Agneau, [Intro.] 23.
62 Ibid., 21. See also Baumstark, Geschichte, 67.
63 Wheat 4, 14, etc.
pleonastic pronouns for meter; 64 use of yotho and the simple

personal pronoun for the reflexive; 65 clumsy metaphors; 66 and
occasional solecisms. 67 There is also an instance of strikingly
Chalcedonian language, when the author says of Christ: ‫ܘܚܠܛ ̈ܚܝܐ‬
‫ ܒܟܝܢܢ ܗܢܐ ܕܡܐܬ‬.‫“( ܕܟܝܢܗ‬and he mingled the life of his nature /
with that nature of ours which dies”). 68 This parallels a phrase of
Jacob of Serugh: ‫“( ܘܚܠܛܗ ܠܗܢܐ ܟܝܢܐ ܕܡܐܬ ܒܕܠܐ ܡܐܬ‬and he
mingled that nature which dies with that one which does not
die”). 69 Such technical theological expressions are absent from
Cyrillona and typical of a later period. Moreover, Vona showed the
almost certain dependency of Wheat upon a discourse on the
68F
resurrection attributed to Gregory of Nyssa. 70 It seems doubtful,

judging from his other work, that Cyrillona would have made free
use of a Greek text, and whether he even knew Greek is an open
69F
question. 71 His other works, at least, do not evidence any direct

dependence on Greek sources.
Cerbelaud regards Wheat as, while not a translation, perhaps a
70F
“free transposition” and compilation by a later author drawing
64 E.g., Wheat 80 and 184.

65 E.g., respectively, Wheat 81 and 5.
66 See Wheat 104–5, 228–29, 234–35.
67 See esp. Wheat 16, 64, 220–21, 226–27.
68 Wheat 268–69.
69 Assemani, Bibliotheca, 1:326. See TS 1277–78 for the Christological
usage of ‫ܚܠܛ‬.
70 See Vona, Carmi, 115 and passim. This work of Gregory (CPG
3174) is found under the titles In sanctum Pascha and In Christi resurrectionem
oratio iii; text in PG 46:652–81 and Heil, Sermones, 245–70. I present these
parallels in full in Griffin, “Cyrillona,” 21–22.
71 It is of course possible that this work was translated into Syriac, as
very many of Gregory’s works were. There is no surviving translation,

though Martin Parmentier believes a translation of the general collection
to which it belongs may be referenced in both Abdisho and the Chronicle
of Se’ert (see Parmentier, “Syriac Translations,” 145). That it would have
been translated at this very early date is less likely.
16 CYRILLONA
from both Gregory of Nyssa and from Cyrillona. 72 A textual

connection between Wheat and Gregory of Nyssa does indeed
seem possible, if not likely, based not only on these explicit
correspondences, but also on the broader thematic connections
made in their mutual treatments of the symbol of the wheat and
the resurrection of the dead. I am not, however, convinced that the
parallels between Wheat and Pasch are close enough that any kind of
derivation or direct connection between them need be assumed.
Both are of course drawing from a shared fond of tropes found
elsewhere in early Christian literature, 73 but their use of this wheat
imagery is fundamentally different.
As noted, Bickell states his modest case for the Cyrillonan
authorship of Wheat in the preface to his translation, and in his
subsequent edition of the Syriac text he does not discuss
authenticity any further. Landersdorfer largely repeats Bickell,
though deleting Bickell’s shallow argument for including Wheat “to
offer in absolute completeness the poems of Cyrillona”—making
his own basis for continuing to include Wheat, wittingly or not,
even more exclusively theological and apologetic. 74 I believe even
Cerbelaud’s recommendation that Wheat be ranked among
Cyrillonan dubia goes too far. 75 There is no manuscript ascription to
Cyrillona, which would seem a minimum requirement for asserting
“dubious” authenticity. If Wheat had been found in another
manuscript, or even a different place in this manuscript, I do not
72 Cerbelaud, Agneau, [Intro.] 22–23. So also Camplani, “Cirillona

(Qurillona),” 1054.
73 The brief survey of Kötting (“Weizenkorn Gottes”) suggests the
exegetical richness and diversity in the patristic tradition. In contrast to

Gregory and Wheat, for example, Irenaeus developed a eucharistic wheat
imagery in connection with vine symbolism—in quite a different way than
Cyrillona but certainly pointing toward him (see Weinrich, “The Image of
the Wheat Stalk”).
74 Landersdorfer, Ausgewählte Schriften, 47; cf. Bickell, Ausgewählte
Gedichte, 41.
75 Cerbelaud, Agneau, [Intro.] 23. Elsewhere he says simply, “The
authenticity of the homily on the grain of wheat is disputed” (Cerbelaud,

“Kyrillonas,” 557). See also Griffin, “Cyrillona,” 533.
believe Cyrillonan authorship would have ever come into

consideration, based on style or content. 76 Bickell simply made a
false conjecture, informed by apologetic bias, about its authorship.
I can find no critical basis for considering this a work of Cyrillona.
An Anonymous Homily on Pentecost

BL Add. 17,189 (5th/6th cent.) preserves a series of short prose
homilies, labeled in the manuscript as turgame. At page heads the
manuscript attributes them to Ephrem (as does Overbeck), but the
manuscript title seems to imply that the scribe thought they were
by Basil or John Chrysostom. 77 While not by Ephrem, Jansma
would date the first text quite early, to the late 4th or early 5th
cent., a homily on the effusion of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost as
recorded in Acts 2. 78 Based on this dating and the text’s “very
curious correspondences” with Cyrillona, Cerbelaud suggests,
“Perhaps one day we’ll need to count this text as part of the
‘Cyrillonan corpus!’” 79 This opinion has been subsequently
repeated by Peter Bruns. 80
But while this text shares a few modest parallels with Pasch, in
particular, the style and content are very different from the genuine
works of Cyrillona. To cite just one stark difference, this is in
prose. Also, Cyrillona’s works are full of scriptural allusions and
76 It might be noted that the compiler of BL Add. 14,591 clearly

collected some of his texts together because of shared topicality,
regardless of authorship, so that we find together not only these two
memre that share agricultural imagery, but also, e.g., another memra on the
Crucifixion, by Peter of Callinicus (69v–72r), and even another on the
Huns, attributed to Isaac of Antioch (48r–54r).
77 See Wright, Catalogue, 2:407. Two, in fact, are translations from
Greek.
78 BL Add. 17,189, fols. 1–16. Published in Overbeck, Opera selecta,
95–98; French translation in Jansma, “Homélie anonyme,” 157–78. On

dating, see below. Fuller discussion of this text and a more extensive
comparison of it with the work of Cyrillona will be found in Griffin,
“Anonymous Homily.”
80 Bruns, “Cyrillonas,” 159.
18 CYRILLONA
imaginative paraphrase and elaboration, but direct scriptural

citations are almost entirely lacking. The opposite is the case here.
Further, at least two citations from the homily conform to the
Peshitta; 81 Cyrillona contains no Peshitta readings. 82 Another
serious objection is the use of technical theological terminology
and formulas, some of which may have been aimed at the
“Pneumatomachians.” 83 This terminology includes the phrase, ‫ܠܚܕ‬
̈ ‫ܗܟܝܠ ܟܝܢܐ ܐܠܗܝܐ ܕܡܬܝܕܥ ܒܬܠܬܐ‬, 84
apparently a translation of the homoousian formula. Jansma notes
‫ܩܢܘܡܝܢ ܣܓܕܝܢܢ‬
that this formula is absent from Ephrem, who in fact does not use
‫ ܟܝܢܐ‬at all in this technical sense. 85 Such technical vocabulary is
likewise absent from Cyrillona, as is any employment of
84F
controversial rhetoric aimed at heretical opponents. For these and

other reasons, 86 I find little ground to argue that this homily might
have come from Cyrillona’s pen and cannot regard it as authentic.
85F
IDENTITY OF CYRILLONA
As is the wont of scholars, there have been efforts made from the
time of his discovery to correlate Cyrillona, otherwise unknown,
with a known historical figure. Some deductions may be made
concerning his location and date of writing (discussed below).
Otherwise, his writings reveal almost no other personal data,
though from them we clearly see that he was a caring pastor,
perhaps even a bishop. The manuscript in one place ascribes to
him the title “Mar” (‫)ܡܪܝ‬, 87 an honorific used with bishops, but
also more generally for ecclesiastical superiors and the holy. 88
86F
Opinions about his ecclesiastical office in prior literature have

87F
81 See Jansma, “Homélie anonyme,”175.

82 See the Appendix.
83 See Jansma, “Homélie anonyme,” 169–73. This forms the basis
for Jansma’s dating.

84 Overbeck, Opera selecta, 98.19–20.
85 Jansma, “Homélie anonyme,” 170–71.
86 See Griffin, “Anonymous Homily.”
87 BL Add. 14,591, fol. 62r, col. 1, ln. 2.
88 See Bickell, Ausgewählte Gedichte, 9.
often been conflated with speculation about his possible

identification with known historical figures.
Unfortunately, the very name Cyrillona, as already noted, is
entirely unattested outside of his writings. The inconsistent spelling
of his name in the manuscript may indicate he was not even known
to scribes working just two or three generations later. That this
should be the case with a writer of such great talent is dissatisfying
and perplexing, and has therefore provoked speculation about his
identity from his first discovery.
The Cyrillona-Absamya Hypothesis

In his first published notice on Cyrillona, Bickell observed that one
homily concerned the invasion of the Huns in 395, which led him
to observe, “Because Absamya, a nephew of St. Ephrem, also
composed poetry on this topic, the two are probably one and the
same.” 89 Bickell then references the Chronicle of Edessa for the date
of the Hunnic invasion, but his information on Absamya comes
from the same source, where the lemma for 715 Sel. (403/4 CE)
reads: “Absamya (‫ )ܥܒܣܡܝܐ‬the priest, the son of blessed Mar
Ephrem’s sister, composed madrashe and memre on the invasion of
the Huns into Roman territory.” 90
Bickell repeats this basic hypothesis again in his Conspectus, 91
89F
but then in his translation of Cyrillona he expands upon his

reasoning. In the volume introduction, he proposes that the 495
invasion of the Huns provides both the likely dating and a probable
locale for our author, Edessa. He continues,
If our supposition that Cyrillona was an Edessene is found
commendable, then it may not be too bold to identify him
with the Edessene priest Absamya, the son of St. Ephrem’s
sister, who composed ca. 404, according to the Chronicle of
89 Bickell, “Syrisches für deutsche Theologen,” 150.

90 Chron. Edessa 47 (Guidi, Chronica minora I, 6.13–16). See below for
the Syriac text.
91 “Cyrillona … is probably no other than Absamya, the son of St.
Ephrem’s sister, who himself also composed a poem on the invasion of

the Huns” (Bickell, Conspectus, 21).
20 CYRILLONA
Edessa, odes and metrical homilies (madrashe and memre) on the

invasion of the Huns into Roman territory. For Cyrillona
himself also tried his hand, as we see, at both types of poetry
concerning the war with the Huns. 92
Bickell also notes a report in the Vita Ephraemi about the siege of
Edessa by the Huns, about which event the biographer claims
Ephrem wrote, though in fact Ephrem died more than 30 years
previous to the invasion. 93 Bickell deduces from this: “The latter
clearly derives from a confusion of the saint, who died long before
the invasion of the Huns, with his nephew Absamya.” 94
In his introduction to Scourges, Bickell further explains his
claim that, like Absamya, Cyrillona too wrote, “as we see, in both
types of poetry concerning the war with the Huns” (i.e., in madrashe
and memre). Scourges is titled in the manuscript, ‫ܡܕ̈ܪܫܐ ܕܥܠ ܩܡܨܐ‬
̈ ‫ ܘܥܠ ܩܪܒܐ‬.‫ܘܥܠ ܡܪܕܘܬܐ‬. The employment
here of the pl. madrashe is puzzling, since this work consists of what
‫ܕܗܘܢܝܐ ܕܩܘܪܝܠܘܟܐ‬
may be, at best, a single short introductory madrasha (26 lines)

followed by a memra (663 lines). Bickell explains this structure, and
continues,
Now one must ask if both these components of our poem
originally belonged together. Clearly both were sung at the
same feast; for we find in both the madrasha and the memra
clear references to a feast of all martyrs and saints celebrated at
that time. They therefore follow each other very directly and
stand in close connection; however, each must have originally
been an independent poem. The madrasha, in any case,
contained many more lines following, which were omitted by
the copyist who, as we shall see, also shortened another of
Cyrillona’s poems.
From this emerges a strong argument for the identification of
our Cyrillona with Absamya, the nephew of St. Ephrem, who
composed madrashe and memre on the invasion of the Huns. For

93 See Vita Ephraemi 36 (Amar, Syriac Vita Tradition, T. 84).
Cyrillona also speaks in his memra expressly of the Huns; that

he, however, mentioned also these wild hoards in his madrasha,
of which regrettably only the first two strophes remain to us,
emerges from its title. Therefore, Cyrillona too composed
madrashe and memre on the invasion of the Huns. 95
Bickell’s entire argument therefore rests fundamentally on a single
correspondence between Absamya and Cyrillona. Absamya is said
to have written madrashe and memre on the invasion of the Huns,
and from Cyrillona we have a work, part madrasha and part memra
(on Bickell’s thesis), that has to do with an invasion of the Huns.
But does his argument bridging the differences succeed?
First we must examine all the witnesses to Absamya and his
work. Bickell cites only the Chronicle of Edessa, but there are in
addition other testimonia in various chronicles (ordered in the table
on the following page, chronologically).
Bar Hebraeus has as his source Michael the Syrian, so that
testimony has no independent value. But there are a number of
discrepancies between the remaining five which must be
considered, all of which seem to derive from a single urtext. 96
The first discrepancy is dating. In the first four witnesses,
where Absamya is mentioned in connection with dated lemmas, the
dates all disagree, ranging from 708 Sel. (396/97 CE) to 715 Sel.
(403/4 CE). The only date specifically assigned to his
compositional activity is the latest, in lemma 715 of the Chronicle of
Edessa. Michael the Syrian mentions him at a chapter’s end with
some other incidental items, including the fire set by rioters to
Hagia Sophia at the banishment of Chrysostom (20 June 404) and
the appearance of a great comet (probably 400). 97
95 Ibid., 16.
96 I follow here the analysis and conclusions of Witakowski,
“Chronicles of Edessa.”
97 Michael’s description appears to draw on the language of Socrates,
Hist. eccl. 6.6, describing the comet C/400 F1 which appeared in 400,
“reaching from heaven even to the earth.” See Cameron, “Earthquake,”
352.
22 CYRILLONA
Chron. Ps. Chron. ad Chron. ad a. Michael Bar

Edessa 47 98 Dionysius, a. 819 846 pert. the Syrian, Hebraeus,
Chron. pert. 6.2– 207.29– Chron. 8.1 Chron. eccl.
1.188–89 99 4 100 208.3 101 (169.7– 1.133.4–
9) 102 8 103
‫ܫܢܬ‬ ‫]ܒܗܢܐ ܕܝܢ‬ ‫ܘܒܗ‬ ‫ܘܐܦ‬ ‫ܘܒܗ ܒܙܒܢܐ‬ ‫ܘܡܬܝܕܥ‬
̣
‫ܫܒܥܡܐܐ‬ [‫ܙܒܢܐ‬ ‫ܒܙܒܢܐ‬ [‫]ܒܗܢܘܢ‬ ̇ ‫ܡܬ ̣ܝܕܥ‬ ̇
̣ ‫ܗܢܐ‬ ‫ܗܘܐ ܗܝܕܝܢ‬
‫ܘܚܡܫܥܣ�ܐ‬ ‫ܡܬܝܕܥ‬ ‫ܐܦ‬ ‫ܙܒܢܐ ܝܕܝܥܝܢ‬ ̈ ‫ܥܒܣܝܡܝܐ‬ ‫ܥܒܣܝܡܝܐ‬
104
‫ܥܒܣܡܝܐ‬ ‫ܥܒܣܡܝܐ‬ ‫ܥܦܣܡܝܐ‬ ‫ܗܘܘ‬ ‫ܩܫܝܫܐ ܒܪ‬ ̣ ‫ܩܫܝܫܐ ܒܪ‬
‫ܩܫܝܫܐ ܒܪ‬ ‫ ܒܪ‬.‫ܡܠܦܢܐ‬
̣ ‫ܩܫܝܫܐ ܒܪ‬ ‫ܐܦܝܦܢܝܘܣ‬ ‫̇ܚ ̣ܬܗ ܕܡܪܝ‬ ‫ܚܬܗ ܕܡܪܝ‬
‫ܚܬܗ‬ ‫ܚܬܗ ܕܡܪܝ‬ ‫ܚܬܗ ܕܡܪܝ‬ ‫ܕܩܘܦܪܘܣ‬ ‫ܐܦܪܝܡ‬ ‫ܐܦܪܝܡ‬
‫ܕܛܘܒܢܐ ܡܪܝ‬ [. . .] ‫ܐܦܪܝܡ‬ ‫ܐܦܪܝܡ‬ ‫]ܘܣܘܝ[ܪܝܢܐ‬ ‫ܡܠܦܢܐ‬ ‫ ܗܢܐ‬.‫̣ܡܠܦܢܐ‬
‫ܐܦܪܝܡ ܣܡ‬ ‫ܘܥܫܕ ܡܕ̈ܪܫܐ‬ ‫ܡܬܝܕܥ‬ ‫ ܐܦ‬.‫ܕܓܒܠܐ‬ ‫ܕܐܝܬܘܗܝ‬ ̣ ‫̣ܣܡ‬
‫ܡܕ̈ܪܫܐ‬ ‫ܥܠ ܡܬܝܬܐ‬ ‫ܗܘܐ‬ ‫ܐܦܣܝܡܐ‬ ‫ܗܘܐ‬ ̣ ‫ܡܐܡ�ܐ‬
‫ܘܡܐܡ�ܐ‬ ̈
.‫ܕܗܘܢܝܐ‬ .‫ܡܠܦܢܐ‬ ‫ܒܪ ܚܬܗ‬ .‫̇ ̣ܡܟܬܒܢܐ‬ ̈
‫ܣܓܝܐܐ‬
‫ܥܠ‬ ‫ܘܥܒܕ‬
̣ ‫ܕܡܪܝ‬ ‫̇ܗܢܐ ̣ܣܡ‬ ‫ܒܢܝܫܐ ܕܡܪܝ‬
‫ܡܐܬܝܬܐ‬ ‫ܡܕ̈ܪܫܐ‬ ‫]ܐܦܪܝ[ܡ‬ ‫ܡܐܡ�ܐ‬ ‫ܐܦܪܝܡ ܥܠ‬
‫ܕܗܘܢܝܐ ܠܒܝܬ‬̈ ‫ܥܠ‬ ‫ܣܘܪܝܝܐ܉ ̇ܗܘ‬ ‫ܣܓܝܐܐ ܥܠ‬ ̈ ‫̇ ̣ܡܦܩܬܐ‬
.‫̈ܪܗܘܡܝܐ‬ ‫ܡܐܬܝܬܐ‬ ‫ܕܥܒܝܕ ܠܗ‬ ‫ܡܦܩܬܐ‬ ̈
‫ܕܗܘܢܝܐ‬
̈
.‫ܕܗܘܢܝܐ‬ ‫ܡܕ̈ܪܫܐ ܥܠ‬ ̈
‫ܕܗܘܢܝܐ‬ ‫ܕܢܦܩܘ ܒܙܒܢܐ‬ ̣
‫ܡܐܬܝܬ]ܐ‬ ‫ܕܢܦܩܘ ܒܙܒܢܐ‬ ̣ .‫ܗܢܐ‬
̈
.‫ܕ[ܗܘܢܝܐ‬ ‫ܘܣܡ‬ ̇
̣ .‫ܗܢܐ‬
‫ܐܢܘܢ ܒܗ‬ ̇
‫ܒܢܝܫܐ ܕܡܪܝ‬ ̣
.‫ܐܦܪܝܡ‬
The year [At that And in And also [in And in that And
715 (403/4 time (i.e., that time these] times time Absimya the
CE), 708 Sel. = (i.e., 714 (i.e., 711 Sel. Absimya the priest
Absamya 396/97 Sel. = = 399/400 priest flourished
the priest, CE)] the 402/3 CE) flourished, then, the
the son of doctor CE) also flourished the son of son of Mar
blessed Mar Absamya Apsamya Epiphanius Mar Ephrem the
Ephrem’s flourished, the priest, of Cyprus Ephrem the doctor’s
sister, the son of the son of [and doctor’s sister. He
composed Mar Mar Seve]rian of sister, who composed
98 Guidi, Chronica minora I, 6 lns. 13–16.

99 Chabot, Chronicon, 188–89.
100 Barsaum, Chronicon anonymum, 6.
101 Brooks, Chronica minora II, 207–8.
102 Chabot, Chronique, 4:169.
103 Abbeloos and Lamy, Chronicon ecclesiasticum, 1:133.
104 Witakowski (“Chronicles of Edessa,” 495) reads this as ‫ܐܒܣܝܡܐ‬,
but the yod appears to me clearly written, and is also reflected in both Bar
Hebraeus, which derives from Michael, and also the translation of Chabot
(Chronique, 2:9).
madrashe and Ephrem’s Ephrem Gabala; also was a writer. many memre
memre on […] 105 the Apsima, the He in the meter
the invasion sister, and Syrian’s son of Mar composed of Mar
of the Huns composed sister, [Ephre]m many memre Ephrem on
into Roman madrashe on flourished the Syrian’s on the the
territory. the invasion , (who sister, who incursion of incursion of
of the was) a composed the Huns, the Huns,
Huns. doctor madrashe on who who
and the invasion invaded at invaded at
compose [of] the that time, that time.
d madrashe Huns. and he
on the composed
invasion them in the
of the meter of
Huns. Mar
Ephrem.
The second discrepancy between the chronicles is in the spelling of

Absamya’s name, variously given as ‫ܥܒܣܡܝܐ‬, ‫ܥܦܣܡܝܐ‬,
‫ ܐܦܣܝܡܐ‬and ‫ܥܒܣܝܡܝܐ‬. The spelling ‫ܥܒܣܝܡܝܐ‬, found in
Michael the Syrian and Bar Hebraeus, seems to derive from the
earliest sources for the Absamya tradition and is likely the
original. 106 This is important for the only other evidence-based
argument adduced in favor of Bickell’s hypothesis. Czeglédy
105F
observed that, based on early inscriptions published by Segal, 107

“the word Absamya appears as a theophoric name of heathen
106F
origin. Thus it is almost certain that Absamya also had another—

Christian—name.” 108 The argument that Cyrillona was the priest-
name of Absamya was not advanced by Bickell (pace Sauget), 109 but
107F
it was soon suggested and often repeated, and may be implicit in

108F
Bickell’s reasoning. 110 109F
105 Based on the other witnesses, the word that has been lost here is
most likely ‫ ;ܡܠܦܢܐ‬i.e., “Ephrem the doctor.”
106 See on this point the following discussion and note on Segal, and
below on the title ‫ܡܠܦܢܐ‬.

107 See Segal, “Some Syriac Inscriptions,” 21–22. The reference in
Czeglédy is incorrect.
108 Czeglédy, “Syriac Legend,” 239.
109 See Sauget, “Cyrillona,” 214.
110 The first mention of it that I can find is in Wright, Short History,
42, who rejects Bickell’s thesis. Landersdorfer introduces the priest-name

24 CYRILLONA
Segal was somewhat less declarative than Czeglédy that the

name Absamya is a pagan theophoric, 111 though even assuming it is
(very likely), the degree to which this datum makes it “almost
certain” that Absamya took a Christian name would need to be
argued. Amir Harrak has shown that pagan theophoric names are
found in Syriac Christian use throughout the 4th and 5th centuries,
and even later, as seen even with such luminaries as Rabbula (“Bel
is great”) and Rabban Hormuzd. 112 Hormuzd was the supreme god
of Mazdaism, and “this Mazdean divine name is still borne almost
exclusively by members of the Christian community of Iraq.” 113
While there were at times attempts to alter the pagan theophoric
names of historical figures, or at least reinterpret them through
creative etymology, their continued use seems to indicate (together
with common sense) that “names do not necessarily reflect the
belief of their holders.” 114
A related question is just how common, and therefore how
plausible here, a change of name was at ordination or upon
entering a monastic order. Phillipe Escolan, citing Cerbelaud,
invokes Absamya/Cyrillona as his only example of monks
hypothesis into his revision of Bickell’s translation, at the end of his

introductory discussion (Ausgewählte Schriften, 8), to which he adds the
misleading note: “This hypothesis, which Bickell stated previously in the
first edition of the translation at hand, is in itself entirely probable and has
also found approval, cf. Duval, Lit. syr., p. 336.” Landersdorfer must be
referring to Bickell’s general Cyrillona-Absamya hypothesis, not
specifically the priest-name hypothesis.
111 Segal says specifically: “These names (i.e., Absamya, Barsamya, et
var.) have been associated with a deity Seimios, who is probably

mentioned by Lucian, De dea Syria, as Σημήιον … But Seimios would
doubtless be rendered in these texts as ‫ ܣܝܡܝܐ‬or ‫ ;ܫܝܡܝܐ‬cf. ‫ܣܝܡܝ‬,
Cureton, Spic., 45 (= ‫ ܟܣ‬1. 20). Samyā, the blind one, may be an epithet of
Mars, as among the pagans of Harran according to our late Arab sources”
(“Some Syriac Inscriptions,” 21). His supposition is supported by the
spelling found in our best source, Michael the Syrian.
112 Harrak, “Pagan Traces.”
113 Ibid., 1–2.
114 Ibid., 4.
changing their names to indicate separation from their former,

secular lives. But Escolan recognizes that even this sole specific
instance is just “a hypothesis” and that “our knowledge of this
subject is very limited.” 115 In fact, propositions regarding such
name changes appear mostly theoretical.
A third discrepancy between the chronicles is whether the
significant title ‫ ܡܠܦܢܐ‬belongs to Absamya (Ps. Dionysius, Chron.
819) or to Ephrem (Michael the Syrian/Bar Hebraeus). That such
an honorific would be applied to an otherwise unknown author is
surprising, though of course it is regularly used of Ephrem. Witold
Witakowski finds this variant especially significant:
In this lemma two qualifications of Abhsamia appear: “priest”
(qaššīšā) and Doctor (malləpānā). It seems as if [Chronicle of
Edessa], [Ps. Dionysius], [Chron. 819] and [Chron. 846] did
different extracts of the lemma of [the “original” Chronicle of
Edessa], which they, for one reason or another, did not fully
understand. Thanks to [Michael the Syrian’s] more exhaustive
information and his better understanding of the apparently
corrupted text of [“original” Chronicle of Edessa], we learn that
Ephrem, not Abhsamia, was called malləpānā—‘teacher, master,
doctor,’ a title the Syriac writers, not unlike their medieval
contemporaries in Western Europe, reserved for those of their
Fathers who were kept in especially high esteem. 116
From his analysis of this and other important variants, Witakowski
concludes that Michael the Syrian is in fact drawing upon a source
115 Escolan, Monachisme et église, 163, 163n2. Cf. Cerbelaud, Agneau,

[Intro.] 8, who says, “it is generally accepted that one must identify
Cyrillona with a certain Absamya.” Cerbelaud observes that a change of
name makes sense upon entering a monastic order although, on the other
hand, Cyrillona’s preoccupation with the mystery of the Eucharist is most
befitting a priest, admitting therefore that “it is difficult here to move
beyond the stage of conjecture.” Nevertheless, Bettiolo (“Lineamenti,”
540) and Vergani (“‘Mondo creato,’” 126) accept both Cerbelaud’s
identification of Cyrillona with Absamya and his rationale for the name
change, even suggesting that this represents the critical consensus.
116 Witakowski, “Chronicles of Edessa,” 494–95.
26 CYRILLONA
prior to the “original” Chronicle of Edessa (OXE), apparently corrupt

here, which he designates the Primeval Chronicle of Edessa (PXE). 117
There is, then, reason to think that the more coherent reading of
Michael the Syrian here, as well as his orthography for the name
Absamya, is due to more detailed and accurate source material.
Michael the Syrian’s unique and valuable testimony is also
significant for a final and most crucial discrepancy, the conflicting
data on Absamya’s literary production. All witnesses agree that
Absamya wrote on the Huns, but he is variously said to have
written “madrashe and memre,” just “madrashe,” or “many memre.”
Michael the Syrian is the witness to the latter, and he also adds the
singular detail, “and he composed them in the meter of Mar
Ephrem.” This would be the 7+7 meter employed by Ephrem in
his memre. This datum seems unique to Michael’s source (PXE). All
the other witnesses, per Witakowski’s analysis, are based upon
OXE (=PXE + other sources), which apparently included the
“madrashe” datum but omitted the detail concerning them being in
Ephrem’s meter. Thus the collective early tradition, apparently
from two somewhat differing sources, was that Absamya wrote
madrashe and “many memre” in 7+7 meter on the invasion of the
Huns.
This brings us back to Bickell’s principal argument, that
Absamya is reported to have written madrashe and memre on the
invasion of the Huns, to which Cyrillona’s work Scourges
corresponds. First, it should be noted that this poem only deals
with the Huns and other conflicts, East and West, briefly and as
one of several themes. The Huns are mentioned just once by name
(Scourges 264) and are treated—and in only a general way—for just
forty lines (out of 689). The discussion of the plague of locusts is
several times that length, and the barbarian invasions are just one
of several scourges discussed. So while it is accurate to say that
“Cyrillona speaks in his memra expressly of the Huns,” 118 one could
nevertheless not rightly say that this is a work on the Huns. While
the Huns are indeed mentioned, and even feature in the poem’s
117 See ibid., 494–96, for fuller discussion and his proposed stemma.
(probably secondary) title, a more properly descriptive title for this

poem would be, as Cerbelaud suggests, On the Scourges. 119
Bickell argues that we may suppose that the prefatory madrasha
(Scourges 1–26) is only a fragment, abridged by the copyist, and
which originally “mentioned these wild hoards.” That the madrasha
originally treated the Huns, he says, “emerges from its title,” 120
namely, because it refers to ‫ܕܗܘܢܝܐ‬ ̈ ‫ܡܕ̈ܪܫܐ ܥܠ ܩܪܒܐ‬. But
construing this as evidence of omitted content is overly imaginative
and entirely unnecessary. Even Landersdorfer, who shows a very
light hand in his revision of Bickell, seems less certain about
Bickell’s line of argumentation here. He emends Bickell’s assertion
that the wording of the title presents “a strong argument” (ein
starkes Argument) for redaction to rather “an important argument”
(ein wichtiges Argument), 121 and deletes entirely an earlier reference to
Cyrillona authoring, like Absamya, both madrashe and memre on the
120F
Huns. 122
However, as shown, two independent witnesses do indeed
12F
certify that Absamya wrote memre on the invasion of the Huns,

which may suggest a correspondence with this memra of Cyrillona.
But the primitive testimony preserved in Michael the Syrian is that
Absamya’s memre were “in the meter of Mar Ephrem,” or 7+7.
Cyrillona’s memra is in 4+4.
Bickell’s Cyrillona-Absamya hypothesis was repeated,
especially, by other early scholars, usually as fact and without
119 See Cerbelaud, Agneau, [Intro.] 15, 72: “Les fléaux.”

121 Landersdorfer, Ausgewählte Schriften, 10.
122 Cf. Bickell, Ausgewählte Gedichte, 13, and Landersdorfer,
Ausgewählte Schriften, 7. The deleted sentence is, “For Cyrillona himself also
tried his hand, as we see, at both types of poetry concerning the war with
the Huns.” Quite inconsistently, however, Landersdorfer allows to stand
the far more objectionable conclusion, “Therefore, Cyrillona too
composed madrashe and memre [sic!] on the invasion of the Huns” (Bickell,
Ausgewählte Gedichte, 16; Landersdorfer, Ausgewählte Schriften, 10).
28 CYRILLONA
further comment. 123 But very early on, Wright raised an obvious
objection: “That ‘Absamyā may have taken the name of Cyrillōnā
at his ordination is of course possible, but it seems strange that
none of these three writers should have mentioned it, if such were
the case.” 124 Wright’s objection has occasionally been noted by
subsequent scholars 125 and, independent of that, the Cyrillona-
Absamya hypothesis has frequently been critiqued and rejected. 126
Yet we see still, up to the present, scholars suggest that Cyrillona
may have been Absamya or, more simply and ambiguously, the
nephew of Ephrem. 127 Often this is presented as “obviously just a
hypothesis,” 128 but based on the evidence, this hypothesis must be
judged highly unlikely.
The Cyrillona-Qiyore Hypothesis

A second hypothesis is that Cyrillona may have been Qiyore
(‫ ;ܩܝܘܪܐ‬Cyrus), who is said by Barḥadbšabba of Ḥalwan to have
been Narsai’s immediate predecessor as head of the School of the
Persians at Edessa. 129 This was first suggested tentatively (“serait”)
128F
123 See, e.g., Cayrè, Manual of Patrology, 1:385, and Tixeront, Handbook
of Patrology, 220. More critical, and impressive for a general treatment, is
Bardenhewer, Geschichte, 4:398.
124 Wright, Short History, 42. The three writers he refers to are the
author of the Chronicle of Edessa, Ps. Dionysius, and Bar Hebraeus. Duval
in an early article approvingly notes Wright’s “convincing arguments”
against Bickell (”Histoire politique,”436), but would then later say of
Bickell’s thesis, “this is only a hypothesis, but a plausible hypothesis”
(Littérature syriaque, 336).
125 See Duval, “Histoire politique,”436, and Littérature syriaque, 338;
Landersdorfer, Ausgewählte Schriften, 8n1; Baumstark, Geschichte, 67n10.

126 See, e.g., Brock, Brief Outline, 30, and “Qurillona;” Chabot, “Syriac
Language and Literature,” 409; Luther, Syrische Chronik, 115; and Murray,
Symbols, 34.
127 In addition to the previously noted, see also, e.g., Vona, Carmi,
19, and Podskalsky, “Tod des Judas,” 512.

128 Sauget, “Cyrillona,” 214.
129 See Scher, Cause de la fondation, 382, for Barḥadbšabba’s
description of Qiyore.
by Addai Scher in a 1906 article on East Syrian authors. 130 Scher

again raised the possibility in his subsequent edition of
Barḥadbšabba’s history of the Persian schools. 131 In neither place
does he state the precise grounds for his conjecture, but his initial
article rehearses what is known of both authors and apparently
leaves it to the reader to weigh the possibility of their identity. The
merits implied by Scher for this thesis seem to be:
(1) There is some similarity between the two names. In Scher’s
initial article he transliterates them as “Cyoré or Kyoré” (‫)ܩܝܘܪܐ‬
and “Cyrollona” (sic), though in his edition of Barḥadbšabba he
employs the normative spelling, Cyrillona.
(2) The dating for both is roughly complementary. Scher suggests a
death date of 437 of Qiyore, which has been conventionally
accepted. 132
(3) Scher summarizes the Cyrillona-Absamya hypothesis, noting
that Absamya was the nephew of Ephrem. There is likewise some
connection of Qiyore to Ephrem in that Qiyore was a close
successor to Ephrem as head of the school at Edessa.
Barḥadbšabba also notes that Qiyore regretted that the
writings of the Interpreter (i.e., Theodore of Mopsuestia) had
not yet been translated, but he based his exegesis for the time
being on the commentaries of Ephrem. 133
These suggested similarities between Cyrillona and Qiyore are even
more modest than they might appear:
(1) It is very difficult to see how one might get from ‫ ܩܝܘܪܐ‬to
‫ܩܘܪܠܘܢܐ‬/‫ܩܘܪܝܠܘܢܐ‬, or vice versa. Scher’s eccentric (initial)
transliterations, Cyoré and Cyrollona, seem calculated to imply
slightly more visual similarity that actually exists. As discussed
above, it is most probable that Cyrillona is a diminutive form of
130 Scher, “Étude supplémentaire,” 3–4.

131 Scher, Cause de la fondation, 382n2.
132 See Vööbus, History, 11.
133 ‫ܡܫܠܡܢܘܬܐ ܕܡܪܝ ܐܦܪܝܡ ܡܦܫܩ ܗܘܐ‬ ̈ ‫( ܐܠܐ ܕܫܥܬܐ ܡܢ‬Scher,
Cause de la fondation, 382.8–9).
30 CYRILLONA
Cyril. The equation of Cyrus with Cyril, if that is Scher’s logic,

would require argumentation.
(2) The dates for our authors may overlap, but absent other
evidence, this is no more than a coincidence.
(3) Scher seems to imply here that Cyrillona is somehow both
Absamya, Ephrem’s nephew, and Qiyore, Ephrem’s successor at
the School. But that would mean rather than having to reconcile
two different names for one author, without any literary evidence
or testimonia, we would now have to reconcile three.
It is questionable whether Barḥadbšabba of Ḥalwan’s Qiyore was
even who he records him to be. The Ecclesiastical History of
(perhaps) another Barḥadbšabba 134 records Rabbula as Narsai’s
predecessor as head of the school. 135 Which is correct? Vööbus
laments,
It is impossible to unravel the situation. It may well be that this
question is not an either-or choice at all. Perhaps we have here
to do with the emergence of two leaders of the School of
Edessa from the sands of time—the school may have had even
other school-masters whose names as well as order of service
had become blurred in the memory of the tradition. In any
case, the tradition is no longer sure who the last head of the
school was prior to Narsai. 136
Becker agrees that the early history of the school by this time “had
become obscure,” and also points out the curious fact that “both
of these names [Rabbula and Qiroye] belonged to renowned
enemies of the school.” 137 The other Qiyore/Cyrus (‫ ܩܘܪܐ‬or
‫)ܩܘܪܘܣ‬, later reviled as “a doctor of falsehood,” was the bishop of
134 See the discussion of Becker, Sources, 11–16. There are strong
correlations between the two Barḥadbšabbas, but their identification is far
from certain.
135 Nau, Histoire ecclésiastique, 598.11.
136 Vööbus, History, 61–62.
137 Becker, Fear of God, 59.
Edessa who secured the expulsion of the school in 489. 138 To even
attempt to correlate this obscure figure, Qiyore, with another who
is entirely unknown, Cyrillona, is no more than imaginative
guesswork.
Scher’s Cyrillona-Qiyore hypothesis has been occasionally
repeated, usually in conjunction with Bickell’s Cyrillona-Absamya
hypothesis. 139 But I agree with Brock that Scher’s proposal is “even
more unlikely” than Bickell’s. 140 Scholars have dissented from
Scher at times expressly, 141 but more often, it seems, by simply
ignoring his proposal. 142
However much we may wish otherwise, it is an unfortunate
fact that, at the present state of research, Cyrillona remains entirely
unknown to us except through the witness of his work.
DATE OF WRITING
Cyrillona has traditionally been dated to the end of the fourth
century, primarily based on his reference in Scourges to an invasion
of the Huns, which Bickell and subsequent scholars have
concluded must refer to the great Hunnic incursion into the eastern
Roman Empire in 395. No one has ever comprehensively
examined the question of Cyrillona’s dating, but a careful
consideration of evidence makes this early date even more certain.
Unable to equate Cyrillona with any known historical figure,
only internal textual data can assist us in dating the author and his
work. A primary point of reference might be his citation of other
Syriac authors, but no direct citation has thus far been confidently
identified. While definite thematic and stylistic parallels to Ephrem
may be observed, Cyrillona never cites, as far as I can discover,
Ephrem or any other early Syriac author. Likewise Cyrillona
138 Vööbus, History, 32.

139 E.g., Segal, Edessa, 160.
140 Brock, Brief Outline, 30.
141 See Baumstark, Geschichte, 67; Diettrich, “Bericht,” 196n2; Maas,
Exegesis and Empire, 106n448; Murray, Symbols, 34.

142 See Landersdorfer, Ausgewählte Schriften, 8, and Vona, Carmi, 19n3,
both of whom cite Scher with respect to his discussion of Cyrillona-

Absamya, but without any mention of his own Cyrillona-Qiyore thesis.
32 CYRILLONA
abstains from polemical engagement with theological opponents

and from controversy. This is most unlike Ephrem and, indeed, as
Cerbelaud muses, “The fact is rare enough, in the patristic era, to
rate our attention.” 143 Cyrillona does attack the Jews as a whole,
but not specific communities of Jews or Judaizers as do Aphrahat
and Ephrem. In common with many other early authors, his
language is grounded in biblical anti-Judaism (and for Cyrillona,
particularly Johannine) and in a classical supercessionist typology,
but unlike Aphrahat and Ephrem, Cyrillona’s rhetoric seems more
a formal and theological exercise than actual response to a
perceived threat. 144 With this apparent absence of immediate
influences and adversaries, the most useful data available to us for
dating appear to reside in Cyrillona’s use of the Bible and in certain
potentially datable references to contemporary catastrophes in On
On Cyrillona, the Bible and dating, the issue can be briefly

the Scourges.
stated as follows: 145 Identifying the version of the Gospels which

Cyrillona used assists in dating him because his use of the Peshitta
Gospels would suggest a mid-fifth century or later date while use
of the Old Syriac Gospels or the Diatessaron, or even clear
Diatessaronic influence, would better suggest an earlier date. There
is certainly no question that Cyrillona used the Separated Gospels
since, for example, he directly refers to the Four Evangelists 146 and
engages specifically, and at great length, with the Gospel of John.
However, for all his extensive engagement with the gospel
texts, I can identify only five gospel quotations or close paraphrases
that contain versional distinctives—three in agreement with the
Old Syriac; one probably and a second certainly with the
Diatessaron; and none agreeing with the Peshitta. Cyrillona also

144 On the New Testament and supercessionism in Ephrem, see
Shepardson, Anti-Judaism, 26–29, 95–105; on the Nation/Nations
supercessionist typology in Ephrem and early Syriac literature, see
Darling, “‘Church from the Nations,’” and Murray, Symbols, 41–68.
145 See the Appendix for a full discussion of the evidence I
summarize here.
references another famous pre-Peshitta reading when he says, “The

lance (‫ )ܪܘܡܚܐ‬pierced Christ / and streams of mercy flowed to
us.” 147 Pesh. John 19:34 (OS lacunate here) reads ‫ ܠܘܟܝܬܐ‬for
‫ܪܘܡܚܐ‬, and while the origin of this pre-Peshitta reading cannot be
certainly known, the ‫ ܪܘܡܚܐ‬that pierced the side of Christ became
the basis for a vivid typology in early Syriac exegesis. While it
provides only a broad window for dating, this combined evidence
would indicate Cyrillona was probably writing in the late-fourth or
early-fifth century.
Dating Scourges
Four specific historical events are mentioned in Scourges: a drought,
a plague of locusts, conflicts and invasions which included Huns,
and an earthquake. The primary focus of Cyrillona is upon the
concurrent and related events of the drought and the locusts,
which had directly affected and afflicted his auditors. These types
of distress, common in the greater Mediterranean right up to the
present, are attested in numerous ancient histories and chronicles,
sermons, hagiographies, and of course in the Bible.
The Drought
Cyrillona gives a clear and vivid description of a drought he and his
people had suffered:
For two years
you impoverished winter
and the milk of the breasts
of heaven failed.
The seeds were doubled,
but the sprouts withered,
for you brought upon us
July in March. (Scourges 336–43)
Cyrillona then details the suffering caused by this two-year drought,
with men wandering about with sacks of jugs, begging for water,
147 Pasch 365–66.

34 CYRILLONA
which became very costly. 148 He seems to describe a crop failure

(“the sprouts withered”), though apparently for the first year only,
since he describes the maturation of a successful crop just before
the locust invasion. 149 Cyrillona’s reference to the story of Elijah
and the widow of Zarephath may suggest a food shortage, but he
also alludes to a bread distribution, and no famine is described. 150
His petitions are that God preserve the crop for offerings, and
“that the fruits be revived, / and let humanity rejoice / in their
abundance.” 151 Such statements seem to reflect with certainty only
scarcity, or in Garnsey’s terminology, a “subsistence crisis,” a
regular occurrence in antiquity, rather than the much rarer crisis of
famine. 152 This would be consistent with research that suggests
famine in antiquity only became a threat if shortages persisted for
two or more annual cycles. 153
Droughts in the Roman Empire, says Stathakopoulos,
“constituted an extremely common phenomenon. As such they
must have often escaped the attention of our sources or would
have been considered too usual or regular phenomena to be worth
recording.” 154 They were also principally a concern for rural
communities, which were of lesser interest to most ancient
148 Scourges 344–59. His lamentation that a drink of water cost a mina
is certainly an exaggeration, but communicates the severity of the drought
(Scourges 358–59).
149 Scourges 380–97.
150 On Elijah and the widow: Scourges 364–75; on bread distribution:
Scourges 356–57.
151 Scourges 12–13, 659–61.
152 “It is a categorical error, committed frequently in the literature, to
describe every food crisis as a famine. … Each food crisis occupies a

place on the continuum leading from mild shortage to disastrous famine.
The proposition for which I will argue is that famines were rare, but that
subsistence crises falling short of famine were common” (Garnsey,
Famine, 6).
153 Patlagean, Pauvreté, 82; cf. Stathakopoulos, Famine, 37. Garnsey
describes the mitigating “normal surplus” that was consistently produced

against frequent and unpredictable food crises (Garnsey, Famine, 53–55).
154 Stathakopoulos, Famine, 37.
historiographers. There appears to be no firmly datable drought in

Syriac-speaking regions before the 7th century. 155 Cyrillona may be
our only source for the one he describes.
The only other recorded drought that correlates to Cyrillona’s
time and general region is one mentioned in Mark the Deacon’s
Life of Porphyry of Gaza. 156 He describes how Porphyry was forcibly
ordained bishop of heavily-pagan Gaza. A severe drought
coincided with his arrival, of which the pagans said: “It was
prophesied to us by Marnas that Porphyry would bring bad luck to
the city.” 157 After the pagans’ entreaties to Marnas failed to bring
rain, the Christians persuaded Porphyry to join them in a fast and
vigil, “for already there was a famine.” 158 When they went out in a
solemn procession the following morning, storm clouds suddenly
blew in and thick rain began to fall, not relenting for three days.
Mark the Deacon records the precise dates of the rainfall:
January 3–5, 396. 159 This would be a mid-winter rainfall. The fact
that the pagans began petitioning for rain in the month of Dios
(Oct. 28–Nov. 26), when the rains customarily begin, 160 and that
there was a preexisting famine, indicates that rains had failed the
previous year. Two rainless months would hardly cause a drought
155 See ibid., 360–62 (no. 194). From the 6th century onwards the
documentation for droughts and infestations improves, perhaps reflecting
increasing frequency due to climate change (Patlagean, Pauvreté, 75).
156 See Vita Porphyrii 16–21 (Grégoire and Kugener, Vie de Porphyre,
14–19); also, Stathakopoulos, “Rain Miracles,” 75, and Famine, 215–16

(no. 35).
157 Vita Porphyrii 19 (Grégoire and Kugener, Vie de Porphyre, 16; trans.
Rapp, “Life of St. Porphyry,” 61).

158 Ibid.
159 Month and days: Vita Porphyrii 21 (Grégoire and Kugener, Vie de
Porphyre, 18); year: Vita Porphyrii 103 (Grégoire and Kugener, Vie de
Porphyre, 79).
160 See Vita Porphyrii 19 (Grégoire and Kugener, Vie de Porphyre, 16).
“The rains begin generally in Gaza around the 15th of November and
cease around the end of April. But it frequently happens that the months
of November and December see no rain, and that it only starts to rain at
the beginning of January” (Grégoire and Kugener, Vie de Porphyre, 96).
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
THE WINNETUXET.
I’ve rowed the Juniata,

I’ve trailed the Kennebec,
I’ve drifted down Algerian shores
Stretched on the upper deck.
I’ve seen the Golden Gate swing wide

To let the sunset through
On wings of flowing opal,
With tangerine and blue.
I’ve idled down the Congo

And dallied up the tide
That girdles the Bahamas,
I’ve floated down the Clyde,
But let me hear the music,

And smell the briar rose,
Of summer’s listless noontide where
The Winnetuxet flows.
Singlehurst,
Plympton, Mass.
HYMN ANCESTRAL.
O, the glory of the Autumn

On the old New England hills,
When the summer-leaf is dying in its pride;
O, the song of wine and wonder
Where the wild grape’s udder fills;
O, the hymn of homage where the gentians hide.
O, the dream enchanted woodlands;

O, the spell that’s on the seas,
And the cricket’s lovesick murmur of repose;
O, the gossamer and damask
Spreading underneath the trees;
O, the silken tassels where the tangle grows.
Let me slumber ’neath the shadow

Of the old New England hills,
Weave my raiment of the starlight when I die;
May the storms caress my temple,
May the winds caress my throne,
In the Pilgrims’ hallowed sands O let me lie.
FEEL OF THE WANDER-LURE.
My sandals are of starlight,

My soul has a flame,
And all the spheres along the sky
Are trumpeting my name.
My spirit, warm and eager,

And longing to be free,
Tired of a Shadow-house of Dreams,
Lured by immensity,
Will answer when the wild winds call
My name, on some dark night,
And I, a lone adventurer,
Will take the Road of Light.
OVERHEARD AT THE MONEY
CHANGERS OF
NINEVEH.
Our Pilgrim sires—brief the story—
They planted and we reaped the glory;
Their simple thrift and noble deeds
We swapped for affluence and creeds;
Our bank account the trickster rifles,
Their Sabbath Day we sold for trifles;
They, wisdom-governed, graced creation,
Ill-timed and aimless, now a nation
Has bartered Freedom at its forum,
Where statesmen wait to find a quorum.
THE INNERMOST.
I would not like to think my song will die into the arching night;
I would not like to think my soul will lose itself in morning light;
But I would have my song increase and star some little world with
peace;
My soul, with beauty stretching far should be the spirit of that star.
THE AUTUMN RAIN.
Mother of Darkness, Mother of Pain,
White on the rim of the autumn rain,
Pressing the cold of your cheek to my face,
Roving the infinite hills of space,
Wandering, wandering everywhere,
Wearing a leaf that is dead in your hair,
Mother of Darkness, Mother of Pain,
White on the rim of the autumn rain.
CRY OF THE WOUNDED LOON.
A dirge was on the waters,

Each wave a muffled bell;
Against the west a hunter strolled,
Nor heeded he the knell.
I heard a cripple calling,
In one unwonted cry of pain,
And down the sorrow of the wind,
The darkness and the river-rain,
The cry went wandering, alone,
Through gloomings of abysmal space,
Till, midst a weary waste of marsh
We met as lovers, face to face.
A dirge hung on the waters,
As from a convent bell,
Against the west a hunter strolled,
Nor wist he of the knell,
But sobbing, sobbing down the years,
Through all my joys and all my tears,
Along the silence comes to me
That Ave Mary of the sea.
Written at Cut River, 1920.

THE OLD BUSH PASTURE.
Give me the old bush-path again

Which wandered past my Uncle Tim’s,
The dusky dells, the musky smells,
That filtered through the sunset glims;
The goblins crouching ’neath the trees,
The bats and witches by the mill,
The foolish talk of all the leaves;
And let me hear the whip-poor-will
Above the pines, the old new moon
Hung high and dry, up there alone,
And golden-clear and far and near,
A-chanting in an undertone
Of something half a-kin to fear,
Which only whip-poor-wills can hear.
Give me the old bush-path again,

The barefoot days, the old-time ways,
The old-time ties, the dragon-flies,
And childish joys unfit for men.
Plympton, Mass.,
September 17, 1920.
A GARLAND.
In one aspiring carillon
God’s Sabbath-bells a-rhyme,
From country-side to country-side
Have set the world a-chime.
Like jewels dropped from heaven,
Ere time or death were known,
The arbutus is blooming,
Where never dust is blown,
For her—the Pilgrim Mother,—
Steadfast and halo-spanned,
Where, still, like constellations burn,
Her footsteps in the sand.
THE UMPAME MUSKETEERS.
The musketeers went marching by,

Went marching, marching, marching by;
On, on with sword and bandoleer,
I saw men come and disappear;
And no one knew the reason why
Went marching, marching by.
But forward swept the caravan,

And step by step and man to man,
In gold and martial hue and sway,
I saw the column march away,
And breast to breast, and none knew why
Went marching, marching by.
Would that my pen could write in time

To glorify this simple rhyme!
But why the dead that ever bleed?
And why was Standish in the lead?
But onward! on! with fife and drum,
With clank and rattle, still they come.
Who knoweth but the winds in flight,
A battle never won a fight?
And still the musketeers go by,
Go marching, marching by.
O Son of Heaven, answer, why

Do musketeers go marching by
With trumpet-blare, in fringe and gold,
And flags that flutter, fold on fold;
And rush and rattle, surge and swing,
And left to right, all glittering
In lordly plumes, that flash and glow,
And guns and stretchers, row on row!
There’s no one knows the reason why
The musketeers go marching by,
Go marching, marching, marching by.
A MEMORY.
Long buried, that Elysian noon

When first I saw the wildering waste of sea,
And felt the call of rainbow wings a-flutter in my little soul—
That elfin music only childhood hears.
O barefoot days, the bickering rains have deluged all the years,
But still the wide blue wonder calls to me,
And some day I shall answer where the waves run wild,
Once more a happy child.
36 Woodland Street,
Hartford, Ct.,
January 17, 1921.
NEW ENGLAND.
New England—Daughter of the Sun—
A laurel on your brow,
The thrill of springtime in your heart,
Yea, we are lovers now,
And we shall wind a lover’s horn
High on the hills of space,
To echo far beyond the stars;
I shall behold your face,
With laughing eyes, when time is not;
Your lifting vistas then,
As now, will haunt and wake in me
A chording great amen.
HILLS O’ MY HEART.
The bloom of night lay on the hills,
Lay on the hills o’ my heart,
When a white star came as on wings of light,
And my soul grew warm,
And my soul grew bright,
With a wild-sweet wonder of yesterday,
Mid a valley green, but it would not stay,
For the bloom of night lay on the hills,
Lay on the hills o’ my heart.
MASCOTTE.
Plymouth wears a dimple,

Kingston wears a rose,
Plympton wears a feather,
Everybody knows.
Search the groves of Arcady,

’Neath the azure sky,
Carver, like a cherished dream,
With a flag goes by.
Like an old doxology,

Glittering, a bugle-mouth,
“Keep to the right, and go ahead!”
Trumpets from the South.
YE OLDEN TIME.
A TRIBUTE.
Written for Carver’s Old Home Day Celebration.
A song to the brave of ye olden time,

Who rest where the night hangs low,
Where never a breeze of the morning stirs,
And only the death-lamps glow.
Where ever and ever, a-side by side,

The prince and the pauper dwell,
While the summer blooms and the autumn fades
And the winter weaves its spell
Through the leafless boughs, and the snow descends,

And wraps them all as one,
And the stars adore, and the still moon waits,
While the hurrying world moves on.
A song to the man of a courtly mien,

With his buckles, and wig, and frill,
And a song to the man with a horny palm,
And the grip of an iron will,
Who planted these fields with their living green,

With the plough, and the hoe and pick;
Who lighted his way by the Psalmist’s lay,
And the glow of a tallowed wick.
A song to the maid of the minuet,

With a blush as of autumn fruit,
Whose wheel was rife with such magic strains
As the strings of a lover’s lute;
Who caught with her shuttle the firelight glim,

As she worked at her cloth of gold,
And took up her task at the early dawn
With the skillet and candle mould.
A song to the dame with her green calash,

Her curls and her pensive grace,
Who gladdened the days with her homespun ways,
And the charm of her tranquil face.
A song to the woman who made the Home,

Who hovered about the nest
With the sheltering wings of a mother’s prayers,
And the warmth of a mother’s breast.
To her be the chaplet of stars we bring!

To her be our gifts of myrrh!
For heaven is heaven and God is God,
For the goodness we found in her.
Swing out ye bells from your signal towers!

Swing out with your tongues of gold!
And mingle your strain, O ye fields of grain,
With a tenderness yet untold,
Till it reach the throngs on those peaks of light

Where the hosts of the holy stand,
And their voices wake for the old love’s sake—
For the loves of life’s yester-land.
SUNDOWN ON THE MARSHES.
The tide is ebbing out to sea;

Much as an old-time tapestry,
Bayeux or Gobelin, it might be,
The wizard weavers weave for me,
In strangely picturesque design,
Of colors rare that intertwine
Like those of Botticelli’s “Spring,”
Or tints that blend a wood-drake’s wing,
With rose-tipped grasses, amethyst,
And blazing jewels, Shylock missed;
While here and there, as if ’twere worn
By splash of spray, the threads are torn,
Or, as ’twere some old water-witch,
Grown weary eyed, had dropped a stitch,
Appears a patch of faded stuff,
Of fretted, dingy-brown, or buff,
With nets of fisher-folk, in spots,
Entangled with the lobster-pots.
But see! a bit of old brocade,
A water-kelpie must have made;
And there’s a garb of quaintest kind
Some Pilgrim farer left behind.
Out where the shallows turn to blood,
Lost in the trailing weeds and mud,
A crimson crescent blinks at me—
A vagabond who loves the sea—
While mythic muse with ancient loom,
Who knows where Clytie’s flowers bloom,
Has wrought of weeds and tinsel string,
A garment suited to a king.
And look! some oracle of time—
Some sorcerer of ooze and slime—
Has left a panoply most rare
For lazy-footed night to wear,
With girdle of a sombre dye,
And hung it on a rock to dry,
Where, flushed with slumber, drones a stream
To charm some lonely mermaid’s dream.
And this my heritage, more fair

Than mosque that ever called to prayer
A Moslem, bids me kneel and pray;
These simple words are all I say—
“I’ve been with God an hour or two”—
A shadow tiptoes down the blue;
And like a mother wraps the sea
In stillness of eternity.
Marshfield, August 16, 1920.

NEIGHBORS.
I love to think o’ days what’s been
’th all the neighbors droppin’ in
To spend the day, or arternoon,
’n in the evenin’ have a tune
Like Mear or some such ainshunt air,
’th cider, ’n’ doughnuts; I declare
It seems jest like they’s settin’ there
A-bindin’ shoes, or knittin’ lace,
Eround that old big fireplace,
Afore some blazin’ apple bough.
There’s too much cultivation now!
I love to think o’ days what’s been—
“Good night—good night, run in agin’.”

Full Ebook of Cyrillona A Critical Study and Commentary 1St Edition Carl Griffin Online PDF All Chapter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Full Ebook of Cyrillona A Critical Study and Commentary 1St Edition Carl Griffin Online PDF All Chapter

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full Ebook of Cyrillona A Critical Study and Commentary 1St Edition Carl Griffin Online PDF All Chapter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cyrillona A Critical Study and

Commentary 1st Edition Carl Griffin

Henry Blake Fuller A Critical Biography Constance M.

Frank R Stockton A Critical Biography Martin I. J.

FIXED BOOKMARKS The Study Quran A New Translation and

Thomas Jeffersons Bible With Introduction and Critical

Commentary on Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics Critical

Space and Place Exploring Critical Issues Exploring

The Egerton Gospel Egerton Papyrus 2 Papyrus Köln VI

Apocalypse Revisited a Critical Study on End Times 1st

George Anton Kiraz

Gorgias Eastern Christian Studies brings to the scholarly world the

A Critical Study and Commentary

All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright

ISBN 978-1-4632-0607-9 ISSN 1539-1507

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication

Names: Griffin, Carl W., author.

Document Template: Template book.dot.

To Tani and Tasha

Table of Contents ..................................................................................... v

Identity of Cyrillona ...................................................................... 18

The Cyrillona-Absamya Hypothesis ..................................... 19

Date of Writing .............................................................................. 31

Place of Writing ............................................................................. 47

About This Study...........................................................................49

Chapter Four. On the Pasch of Our Lord .......................................127

My warmest thanks to Sidney H. Griffith for his wisdom and

WORKS OF EPHREM THE SYRIAN

OTHER SYRIAC TEXTS

1Brock, “From Antagonism to Assimilation,” 17; see also Brock,

this pre-fifth-century stage of Syriac culture, which is

2 Van Rompay, “Past and Present Perceptions,” par. 9. The

minimal changes to Bickell’s translation; in the following study I rarely

substance or even verbatim, at times with attribution to Bickell or

DISCOVERY AND PUBLICATION

6 E.g., Bardenhewer: “Bickell declared the author the most

works of Cyrillona according to the titles and title abbreviations I have

the title of this text is given in the manuscript as simply ‫ܕܥܠ‬

unknown Cyrillona,” one of which was a homily on the invasion of

citations from Cyrillona, in Syriac or English translation, are taken from

‫“( ܐܝܣܚܩ‬From a mimro On the Crucifixion by Mar Isaac”), but this is an

Overbeck’s publication, so this may well represent his independent

with Absamya, and in another place noted that Cyrillona was an

extracts from Scourges are, as Bickell indicates, historical in character, the

Hebrew poetry were also repeated (inaccurately) by Maas (“Scripture

[Mar Qurlokha] or ‫[ ܩܘܪܝܠܘܟܐ‬Qurilokha],” the second followed by

Qurilokha, and the possible derivation of such a name is unclear.

23 Wright, Catalogue, 2:670.

manuscript it does indeed say in both places ‘Cyrilloka,’ ‫ קורלוכא‬instead of

Conspectus, 7, 21, 34–36. His reading of the name certainly represents an

I cannot see for myself any tendency in the manuscript to

fol. 62r, col. 1, ln. 2 fol. 72r, col. 1, ln. 26

In both examples we see that the character in question has an

The inclusion/exclusion of the yudh in ‫ܩܘܪܝܠܘܢܐ‬/‫ ܩܘܪܠܘܢܐ‬is a

makes excellent sense. 31 While the evidence is imperfect, no better

79r–83r ‫ܡܐܡܪܐ ܕܥܠ‬ ‫ܚܛܬܐ ܢܦܠܐ‬ On the Grain of Wheat

As previously noted, BL Add. 14,591 contains three texts attributed

previously, a portion was published by Overbeck as a work of