Text of the Commentary; Chrysostom's Greek text of the Psalter
his received Greek text and admit ignorance of the Hebrew with some such phrase as "those who know that language say...""° His congregation is at times overwhelmed with such true and false erudition — the sign of an inexperienced teacher.'®
TEXT OF THE COMMENTARY; Curysostom's GREEK TEXT OF THE PSALTER Unlike some recent attempts to reconstruct the text of other of Chrysostom's supposed works on Old Testament books, we are in the fortunate position of having a text of the Psalms Commentary
| "en tradition directe," as Rondeau remarks with relief. The significance of this text tradition emerges from a comment like Robert
| Carter's to the effect that composition of the Codices Chrysostomici Graeci for Chrysostom's New Testament homilies involved consultation of 824 manuscripts, and these but a small fraction of the three to four thousand stemming from the Byzantine period."
Though the text tradition of the Psalms Commentary is thus relatively uncomplicated, the downside of our study of Chrysostom's text is that to date there has been no modern critical edition.* And so a mere translator is indebted to the 19th century reprint by J.-P.
Migne" of Bernard De Montfaucon's 18th century edition, dependent itself on the 17th century editions of Savile and Fronton de
Duc, Savile's foundational work resting primarily on a few mss. some six or seven centuries earlier. Translation and commentary on the whole series, however, are probably not at a great disadvantage for all that.
Cf Homily 4 on Git (PG 53,43).
° There is one interesting remark of his that could suggest he speaks as a bishop. On Psalm 50.5 he makes the point that moral correction is best achieved by dealing with the recalcitrant in a dignified manner; and proceeds, "This is theway we behave, too: when we see people offending, we want to touch them more profoundly, so we summon them using titles so as to lend our accusation a more serious note, saying, Call the deacon or the priest."
* "The future of Chrysostom studies: theology and Nachleben,"
SYYMIMOSION. Studies on St John Chrysostom (ANAAEKTA BAATAAQN 18), Thessaloniki, 1973, 133-35.
'S Cf M. Geerard (ed.), Clavis Patriom Graecoruin II, #4413.
Commentary on the Psalms What is less uncomplicated is the question of the text or texts | that Chrysostom had before him when he composed and/or preached on the Psalms at that period of leisure or immature ministry. He seems to have had at his disposal, in addition to his basic
Greek text, a range of alternative Greek translations and the Hebrew text — a unique situation, to judge from his other exegetical works. Several questions arise as we see him handling this relative abundance of resources — one who can speak somewhat disparagingly of "the scholars." What is his basic Greek text? On Psalm
10.4 he cites these variant translations and "the Septuagint," apparently the text he is commenting on; whereas on Psalm 7.9-10 he gives his text before citing a variant and "the Septuagint," which this time differs from the text he has just cited as his. What is this
"Septuagint" text of his, which can differ from another "Septuagint" text?
His quotation ofJob 31.13-15 (in commenting on Psalm 4.1) ina form markedly different from both the Hebrew and a modern composite text of the Septuagint like Rahlfs'" reminds us of the diversity of forms of the LXX current at the time. Jerome, roughly contemporary with Chrysostom, speaks of three forms then current respectively in Alexandria, Constantinople-Antioch, and "the provinces in between;"™he further describes the second of these as "another version which Origen and Eusebius of Caesarea and all the Greek commentators call the popular text, and which by most is now called the Lucianic text,"" the work of the scholar-priest of Antioch, Lucian, a century earlier. The precise character of this
Antiochene form of the LXX, which Chrysostom is thought to exemplify (as also Theodoret of Cyr, likewise commentator on the Psalms), is much debated: the claim for its provenance directly from the Hebrew, made for it by the ancients, is thought unlikely in view of general ignorance of that language;" the responsibility ofLucian is allowed by some moderns, disallowed as a legend by others,
*) A. Rahlfs (ed.), Septuaginta, 2 vols, 7th ed., Stuttgart, 1962. Cf note 49 on Psalm 50 below.
*| Praef. in Paral.(PL 28,1324-25).
2 Ep 106 ad Sunniam ii (PL 22, 838).
% So S. Jellicoe, The Septuagint and Modern Study, Oxford, 1968, 160-161.
4CFD.S, Wallace-Hadrill, Christian Antioch. A study of early Christian thought in the East, Cambridge 1982, 30; B. Drewery, "Antiochien," TRE 3,106. who would prefer to speak of a "texte antiochien" or even Palestinian.* If it is this revised form of the LXX Chrysostom is using as his text for the Commentary on the Psalms, he is not above amending it: the word order of both his text and the Hebrew of Psalm
45.5 leads to nonsense, and so after first relaying it he makes an adjustment, as do modern versions.
What particularly distinguishes Chrysostom's approach to his text of the Psalms, at least the "earlier" part, is his offering of versions alternative to his textus receptus. These can be as many as three — four in one case (for Psalm 11.4-5), where in an obvious slip he cites his own text again as a fourth variant. He never acknowledges the source of these variants, though they have been com- | monly identified as the work of the three translators/revisers of the second century, Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion. Editor
De Montfaucon frequently identifies them as such from the six columns of Origen's Hexapla compiled in the third century; recent work on them asa result of discoveries of Greek and Hebrew mss. would make such identification more tentative." Chrysostom's purpose in offering such an array to a congregation whom he faults for lack of basic biblical knowledge escapes us, unless it be to impress them with his erudition. Reading to his listeners in one hit the four verses 7-10 of Psalm 10 plus all the variants leaves us with a picture of a preacher with a mass of material to hand; and though in a hurry to get through Psalm 46 he still insists on offering them variants to vv.4-5, He rarely offers any evaluation of the variants quoted, deepening our puzzlement as to their pastoral efficacy: on Psalm 45.4, where his text reads "Your right hand will guide you," he finds a variant reading "Your fearful right hand," and gets some mileage from it by comparison with his own reading, which un- ~ Cf D. Barthélemy, Les Devanciers d'Aquila (VTS X), Leiden, 1963, 126-7;
E-L. Guillaumin, "Problémes posés aux éditeurs de Jean Chrysostome par le richesse de son inspiration biblique,"
KG. O'Connell would rather place the origins of this revision of the LXX in Palestine, matching Palestinian Hebrew mss. from Qumran ("Texts and versions," NJBC 1092), and dating back to the late 1st century.
~ He has to admit in many cases, however, ignorance of the provenance of 2 particular variant.
~ Cf O'Connell, art.cit., 79.
~ This, of course, begs the question, which we shall examine in Section 5, f the circumstances of composition/ delivery.