Library › Egeria › Pilgrimage of Etheria

Pilgrimage of Etheria

Egeria, tr. McClure and Feltoe, 1919

d7

7. Etheria’s Use of the Bible

Etheria’s usual name for the Bible is Scriptura (either in the singular or the plural, and with or without the epithet “Holy”). Twice she uses the expression “the Scriptures of God” (pp. 16 and 40). She characterizes the Pentateuch, from which she naturally quotes most often, as “the (holy) books of (holy) Moses.” The most interesting of the titles she uses, however, is (on p. 38) scriptura canonis (“the Scripture of the Canon”), a title which is apparently almost unknown otherwise. Westcott (Canon of N. T. pp. 504 f.) doubted whether Credner’s term γραφαὶ κανόνος had any justification. He himself quoted from Amphilochius (circ. 380) the following as the nearest approach to it: —

οὗτος ἀψευδέστατος
κανὼν ἂν εἴη τῶν θεοπνεύστων γραφῶν.

But now Etheria (ex hypothesi this writer’s contemporary) has given us an even more exact equivalent. As Bishop Westcott says, Canon here must mean the authoritative rule or standard, by which the books have been ratified and approved in the Church.

Her quotations and references to the books of the Old Testament usually give a close representation of the Greek of the Septuagint, although we may imagine from her imperfect knowledge of Greek that they are based on a pre-Vulgate Latin version, not on the Septuagint itself. The proper names she quotes are, as we have shown in the text, good instances of this, and to these we may add one which is perhaps the clearest of all: on p. 26 her Quodollagomor (cf. Gen. xiv.) represents almost exactly the LXX Χοδολλογόμορ, while our Eng. Chedorlaomer represents the Vulg. Chodorlahomor. She has, however, made a slip in calling him “king of Nations” instead of king of Elam: see note in loco. There are a few variations or divergencies which are worthy of note, though it is, of course, doubtful how far they are due to carelessness in her own or her copyist’s transcription. The principal of these are as follows: —

(1) pp. 8 f. Exod. iii. 5, corrigiam calceamenti (the latchet of thy shoe). Here the LXX only gives ὑπόδημα, but see Gen. xiv. 23, and S. Mark i. 7, which probably account for her version. The same reading is found in Origen (Lat. works).

(2) p. 9. Exod. xxxii. 27, de porta in porta. Here we should no doubt read in portam (LXX, ἐπὶ πύλην), as the abl. makes no sense.

(3) p. 15. Gen. xlvii. 6. Etheria’s rendering here represents exactly neither the LXX text nor the Vulg., which are different from one another: she gives in meliori terra Egypti, where the LXX has ἐν τῇ βελτιστῃ γῇ (Vulg. in optimo loco), and she adds in terra Iessen, in terra Arabiae, which the LXX omits, while the Vulg. reads et trade eis terram Gessen. Probably Etheria’s is meant to be only a loose paraphrase, not an exact transcription.

(4) and (5), pp. 18 and 19. For the readings and the explanations of them in Deut. xxxii. 49, and xxxiv. 8, see notes in loco.

(6) p. 13. In quoting apparently Numb. x. 12, and xxxiii. 36, she gives this rendering filii Israel... ambulaverunt iter suum to the LXX ἐξῆραν and ἀπῆραν (Vulg. profecti), but she is probably thinking rather of such phrases as πορεύεσθαι or ποιεῖσθαι ὅδόν than of the exact original: e.g. Prov. ii. 20, ἐπορεύοντο (Vulg. ambulas) τρίβους ἀγαθάς, iii. 23, ἵνα πορεύῃ (Vulg. ambulabis)... τὰς ὅδούς σου, and Judges xvii. 8, τοῦ ποιῆσαι ὅδόν.

(7) p. 6. She follows the LXX version of 1 Kings xix. 9, τί σὺ ἐνταῦθα; (quid tu hic?), a reading which is found in Tert. de Jeiun. 6.

(8) p. 36. In Gen. xxiv. 20, Etheria takes it for granted, as usual, that Abraham’s “eldest servant” is the same as Eliezer of Damascus (xv. 20), though it is merely an assumption. Again, on p. 25, it appears that she accepted the identification of the Salem of Melchizedek (Gen. xiv. 18) with the place of that name near Sychar, not as others do with Jerusalem (cf. Jerome ad Evang. § 27, and Onom.). Her statement on p. 32 that Batanis (Batnae) is mentioned in the Bible is, so far as we know, without foundation:¹ also that Moses was born at Taphnis or Tatnis (p. 17), and wrote the book of Deuteronomy in the plains of Moab (p. 19).

Her actual quotations from the New Testament are not very numerous, and the following are the only ones that need to be commented on: —

(1) In S. Mark xiv. 38 (p. 72), she omits “and pray” and renders ἵνα μή by ne (Vulg. ut non). (2) In S. Luke xxii. 41 (p. 71), καὶ αὐτὸς ἀπεσπάσθη... ὡσεὶ λίθου βολὴν... καὶ προσηύχετο, she has et accessit... quantum iactus lapidis et oravit (Vulg. et ipse avulsus est... quantum iactus est lapidis... et orabat). Is not accessit the copyist’s mistake for abscessit? If so, it is probably a genuine reading of the Latin version Etheria used. (3) In S. John xx. 25 (p. 83), she has non credo, nisi videro, but the Greek is ἐὰν μὴ ἴδω.... οὐ μὴ πιστεύσω: no doubt it is a brief paraphrase, not a quotation. (4) In her reference to S. John xix. 30, on p. 77, she uses the words reddidit spiritum to represent παρέδωκεν τὸ πνεῦμα, a much more expressive phrase than the Vulg. tradidit spiritum. Was this again the reading of her Latin text?

Previous · Contents · Next