{"slug":"tlg4102.tlgX01","id":"greek:tlg4102.tlgX01","title":"Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","author":"Catenae (Novum Testamentum)","genre":"other","date":"","tradition":"greek","coverage":"none","publication":{"status":"machine-draft","reviewed_by":null,"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor","provider":"Relace","generated":"2026-11-14T23:16:23Z","cost_usd":0.006028},"source":{"registry_id":"greek:tlg4102.tlgX01","work_id":"tlg4102.tlgX01","edition":"first1k","language":"","license":"CC BY-SA 4.0","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"},"stats":{"passages":11,"english_words":1889,"coptic_letters":0,"commentary_units":60,"commentary_kinds":8,"derived_notes":1,"ambiguities":21,"work_notes":4,"external_links":4,"timeline":5},"summary":{"work":"tlg4102.tlgX01","abstract":"The Prooemium of Pseudo-Oecumenius’s commentary on the Apocalypse survives as a unique manuscript within the Byzantine catena tradition, a compilation of patristic exegeses rather than a continuous commentary. Attributed to Oecumenius, likely a 6th- or 7th-century bishop of Tricca in Thessaly, the work is one of the earliest Greek commentaries on Revelation. Its incorporation into later catenae influenced Orthodox exegesis, but the single manuscript and lack of critical apparatus obscure the original text, making it difficult to distinguish Oecumenius’s contributions from later scribal additions.","historical_context":"The Prooemium belongs to the catena genre, a Byzantine exegetical practice of compiling excerpts from earlier Church Fathers. The work is attributed to Oecumenius, possibly a bishop of Tricca in Thessaly active in the late 6th to early 7th century, though some confusion exists with a 10th-century writer of the same name. The commentary survives in a single manuscript (codex unicus) of the catena tradition, complicating reconstruction of its original form. Internal evidence suggests a terminus post quem of the 6th century, but the catena compilation may be later. Arethas of Caesarea (c. 860–940) compiled a similar catena on Revelation, drawing on Oecumenius and other sources. The work was transmitted in Greek and influenced later Orthodox exegesis, though it never achieved the authority of major patristic commentaries like those of Andrew of Caesarea or Bede.","significance":"The Prooemium is significant as one of the earliest Greek commentaries on Revelation, providing insight into early Byzantine exegetical methods and the reception of apocalyptic literature. Its inclusion in catenae shaped later Orthodox interpretation, though its fragmentary survival and disputed authorship highlight the challenges of studying catena texts. It relates to the broader tradition of patristic and Byzantine commentary on Revelation, including works by Oecumenius, Arethas, and Andrew of Caesarea.","timeline":[{"date":"6th–7th c.","event":"Probable composition of Oecumenius’s commentary on Revelation, including the Prooemium."},{"date":"c. 860–940","event":"Arethas of Caesarea compiles a catena on Revelation, drawing on Oecumenius and other sources."},{"date":"9th–10th c.","event":"The catena tradition incorporating the Prooemium is transmitted in Byzantine manuscripts."},{"date":"Medieval period","event":"The Prooemium influences Orthodox exegesis of Revelation through catena compilations."},{"date":"Modern era","event":"The single manuscript (codex unicus) is studied by scholars, but lack of critical apparatus complicates reconstruction."}],"relations":[{"work":"Oecumenius, Commentary on Revelation","relation":"The Prooemium is the introduction to this commentary, attributed to Oecumenius.","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Arethas of Caesarea, Catena on Revelation","relation":"Arethas’s catena draws on Oecumenius’s commentary, including the Prooemium.","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Andrew of Caesarea, Commentary on Revelation","relation":"Another early Greek commentary on Revelation, often compared with Oecumenius’s work.","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Byzantine catenae on Revelation","relation":"The Prooemium was incorporated into later catenae, influencing Orthodox exegesis.","key":"","label":null,"url":null}],"external_links":[{"key":"wikipedia:Oecumenius","label":"Oecumenius","url":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oecumenius","reason":"Provides background on the attributed author and his commentary on Revelation."},{"key":"wikipedia:Arethas of Caesarea","label":"Arethas of Caesarea","url":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arethas_of_Caesarea","reason":"Compiler of a catena on Revelation that draws on Oecumenius."},{"key":"wikipedia:Catena (biblical commentary)","label":"Catena (biblical commentary)","url":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catena_%28biblical_commentary%29","reason":"Explains the genre of the work as a compilation of patristic excerpts."},{"key":"wikipedia:Book of Revelation","label":"Book of Revelation","url":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Revelation","reason":"Context for the biblical book being commented upon."}],"cautions":["The date of the Prooemium is uncertain; internal evidence suggests a terminus post quem of the 6th century, but the catena compilation may be later.","Attribution to Oecumenius is disputed; the author may be confused with a 10th-century writer of the same name.","The work survives in a single manuscript (codex unicus) of the catena tradition, complicating reconstruction of its original form.","The edition lacks a critical apparatus for the catena’s sources, making it impossible to distinguish Oecumenius’s original text from later scribal additions."],"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor","provider":"Relace","cost_usd":0.000509,"generated":"2026-11-14T23:16:22Z"},"checks":{"work":"tlg4102.tlgX01","status":"pass","blocking":[],"warnings":[],"stats":{"passages":11,"translated":11,"commentary_passages":11,"commentary_units":60,"english_words":1889,"source_letters":8422,"commentary_kinds":8},"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor"},"work_notes":[{"unit":"transmission","kind":"transmission","basis":"external","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The commentary survives in a single manuscript (codex unicus) of the catena tradition, which complicates reconstruction of its original form.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"dating","kind":"chronology","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"caution","text":"The work is attributed to Oecumenius, but the date is uncertain; internal evidence suggests a terminus post quem of the 6th century, though the catena compilation may be later.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"external","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"This prooemium was incorporated into Byzantine catenae on Revelation, influencing later Orthodox exegesis, but it never achieved the authority of major patristic commentaries.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"caution","text":"The edition does not provide a critical apparatus for the catena’s sources; readers cannot distinguish Oecumenius’s original text from later scribal additions.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"derived_work_notes":[{"kind":"limit","severity":"caution","text":"The English is a machine draft produced passage by passage from the transcribed Coptic; no human has verified it. The commentary is model-written and cites only keys the pipeline could resolve."},{"kind":"register","severity":"info","text":"Register: other in ancient Greek; the English keeps the liturgical formulae and the vocatives rather than normalising them."},{"kind":"structure","severity":"info","text":"Passages: 11 narrative."},{"kind":"scripture","severity":"info","text":"1 scriptural phrase match(es) noted: John 1:14."},{"kind":"source","severity":"info","text":"Source edition: first1k — CC BY-SA 4.0"}],"derived_structure":{"narrative":11},"term_index":[],"citations":{"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01":{"label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}},"segments":[{"i":1,"ref":"p1","source":"ΟΙKΟΥMΕΝΙΟΥ\nΕΠΙΣΚΟΠΟΥ ΤΡΙΚΚΗΣ ΘΕΣΣΑΛΙΑΣ\nΚΑΙ ΑΡΕΘΑ\nΤΟΡ ΚΑΙΣΑΡΕΙΑΣ ΚΑΠΠΑΔΟΚΙΑΣ\nΣΥΛΛΟΓΗ ΕΞΗΓΗΣΕΩΝ ΕΚ\nΑΓΙΩΝ ΑΝΔΡΩΝ\nΕΙΣ THN\nTOT ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΣΤΟΥ\nΑΠΟΚΑΛΥΨΙΝ.","english":"Oecumenius\nBishop of Tricca in Thessaly\nand Arethas\nof Caesarea in Cappadocia\nA Collection of Expositions from\nHoly Men\non the\nApocalypse\nof the Evangelist.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"ΣΥΛΛΟΓΗ ΕΞΗΓΗΣΕΩΝ ΕΚ ΑΓΙΩΝ ΑΝΔΡΩΝ","severity":"info","text":"The title identifies the work as a collection of exegeses (συλλογὴ ἐξηγήσεων) drawn from holy men, signaling its catena genre rather than a continuous commentary.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"ΟΙΚΟΥΜΕΝΙΟΥ ΕΠΙΣΚΟΠΟΥ ΤΡΙΚΚΗΣ ΘΕΣΣΑΛΙΑΣ","severity":"info","text":"Oecumenius, bishop of Tricca in Thessaly (late 6th–early 7th c.), is one of the earliest Greek commentators on Revelation; his identity is sometimes confused with a 10th-century writer.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"ΑΡΕΘΑ ΤΟΡ ΚΑΙΣΑΡΕΙΑΣ ΚΑΠΠΑΔΟΚΙΑΣ","severity":"info","text":"Arethas of Caesarea in Cappadocia (c. 860–940) compiled a catena on Revelation drawing on earlier sources, including Oecumenius; his work is preserved in several manuscripts.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"transmission","kind":"transmission","basis":"text","lemma":"ΣΥΛΛΟΓΗ ΕΞΗΓΗΣΕΩΝ","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'collection of expositions' indicates the work is a catena, a compilation of patristic excerpts, typical of Byzantine exegetical practice and often transmitted with multiple attributions.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"ΤΟΡ","severity":"caution","text":"The word 'ΤΟΡ' (likely a scribal error for 'ΤΟΥ' or 'ΤΗΣ') is corrupt; the intended reading is probably 'τοῦ' (of) or 'τῆς' (of), linking Arethas to Caesarea.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The exact relationship between Oecumenius and Arethas in this catena is unclear; the title may attribute the collection to both or indicate Arethas as a later compiler.","The word 'ΤΟΡ' is a textual corruption; its intended form is uncertain."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":2,"ref":"p2","source":"Ἐκ Τῦν Οἰκουμενίωι τῶλ Μακαρίωι\nΘεσσαλίασ θεοφιλῶσ Πεπονημένων Εἰσ\nἸωάννορ τοῦ Θεολόγορ, Σύνοψισ Σκολικὴ Σύνοψισ\nΔεουσησ οσον κατα Συνοψιν\nΧριστὲ ὁ Θεὸσ σύμπραξον Ἠμῖν a. \n Οτι καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σύγγραμμα ῥάμμα μύησις, τῆς ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐπὶ τὸ\nστῆθος ἀνακλἰσεως b τῆς ὑπερθέου σοφίας τοῦ ἠγαπημένου, ἅτε\nθεοπνεύστου ὃν καὶ ὠφέλιμον ἀναμφιλόγως, κατείληπται· ἀλλ’ οὐ\nτῶν νόθων, ὥς τινες πλάνῳ συγχροτούμενοι πνεύματι ἐληρώδησαν,\nεἰ μὴ καὶ γνήσιον, καὶ τοῦ τῆς βροντῆς ἐπάξιον υἱοῦ. εἴγε πιστέον \nἈθανασίῳ τῷ παμμεγίστῳ, ἐν τῇ ἐκθέσει τῶν κανονιζομένων τῆς\nπαλαιᾶς τε καὶ νέας βιβλίων, τοῖς γνησίοις καὶ τοῦτο ἐγκρίνοντἰ\nἀλλὰ καὶ Βασιλείῳ τῷ θείῳ τοῦτο ἐν τῇ περὶ Υἱοῦ συζητήσει\nσυντόμῳ ἔδειξε, καὶ Γρηγορίῳ τῷ θείῳ τὸν λόγον ἐν τῷ συντακτηρίῳ\nαὐτοῦ λόγῳ· καὶ Μεθοδίῳ τῷ σοφωτάτῳ Ἐπισκόπῳ Πατάρων \nἐν τῷ περὶ ἀναστάσεως· Κυρίλλῳ τε τῷ μεγάλῳ, ἐν τοῖς περὶ\nτῆς ἐν πνεύματ’ προσκυνήσεως καὶ λατρείας αὐτοῦ πόνοις· πρὸς\nτούτοις καὶ Ἱππολύτῳ τῷ Ῥώμης προέδρῳ, ἐν τῇ τοῦ εἰς τὸν\nΔανιὴλ ἑρμηνείᾳ λόγου· καὶ ἄλλοις δὲ πολλοῖς, ἵνα μὴ μακρολόγωμεν,\nοἷς εἰς νόθον καὶ ἀπόβλητον οὐκ ἔδοξεν ἀπερρῖφθαι, εἰ \nμὴ γνήσιον κριθῆναι· οὐκ ἃν τοιούτοις καὶ τοσούτοις ἀκριβασιαῖς\nτοῦτο δοκοῦν, εἰ μὴ τὸ μέτριον αὐτῷ ᾔδεσαν σπουδαζόμενον· εἰ\n a Hoc ProŒmium Œcumenii in Apocal. Commentarii quod\nvulgaverat Montfaucon. Bibl. Coisl. p. 277. ipse descripsi e Cod.\nCoisl. 224. adjecta lectionis varietate e Cod. Barocc. 3. qui initio\nautem mutilus est. b ἀνακλήσεως cod.","english":"From the works of the blessed Oecumenius of Thessaly, composed with love for God, on John the Theologian: a summary in the manner of a scholion, a summary as is fitting for a summary. Christ God, assist us. That this composition is a revelation, from the reclining upon the breast of the super-divine wisdom of the beloved, being both divinely inspired and unquestionably beneficial, has been understood; but it is not among the spurious works, as some, confounded by a wandering spirit, have babbled, but is both genuine and worthy of the son of thunder. For one must trust Athanasius the Great, in his exposition of the canonized books of the Old and New Testaments, who judges this also among the genuine; and also the divine Basil showed this in his brief inquiry concerning the Son; and the divine Gregory in his farewell discourse; and Methodius the most wise Bishop of Patara in his work on the resurrection; and the great Cyril in his labors concerning the worship and adoration of the Spirit; and in addition, Hippolytus, the president of Rome, in his interpretation of the book of Daniel; and many others, to be brief, to whom it did not seem to be cast aside as spurious and rejected, but to be judged genuine; they would not have thought this, with such and so many accurate judgments, if they had not known the moderate value to be sought in it.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"Σύνοψισ Σκολικὴ Σύνοψισ","severity":"info","text":"The repeated 'Synopsis' signals a condensed, scholion-style commentary. The phrase 'Σκολικὴ Σύνοψισ' is likely a scribal error or variant for 'σχολικὴ σύνοψις' (scholastic summary), indicating the work's genre as a catena-like compilation.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἀθανασίῳ τῷ παμμεγίστῳ","severity":"info","text":"The author invokes Athanasius the Great's canon list to authenticate Revelation. This reflects the ongoing debate in the Greek tradition about the book's canonicity, which Athanasius affirmed in his 39th Festal Letter (367 CE).","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Βασιλείῳ τῷ θείῳ","severity":"info","text":"Basil of Caesarea is cited for his 'brief inquiry concerning the Son' (περὶ Υἱοῦ συζητήσει). This likely refers to his work 'Against Eunomius' or a lost treatise, used here to support Revelation's authenticity.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Γρηγορίῳ τῷ θείῳ","severity":"info","text":"Gregory of Nazianzus is cited for his 'farewell discourse' (συντακτηρίῳ λόγῳ), probably Oration 42. This patristic reference bolsters the claim of Revelation's genuineness.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Μεθοδίῳ τῷ σοφωτάτῳ Ἐπισκόπῳ Πατάρων","severity":"info","text":"Methodius of Patara, a 3rd-4th century bishop, is cited for his work 'On the Resurrection' (περὶ ἀναστάσεως). This text, extant in fragments, is used to support Revelation's canonicity.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἱππολύτῳ τῷ Ῥώμης προέδρῳ","severity":"info","text":"Hippolytus of Rome is cited for his commentary on Daniel. This work, likely the 'Commentary on Daniel', is used to authenticate Revelation, showing its acceptance in early Roman tradition.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'Σύνοψισ Σκολικὴ Σύνοψισ' is ambiguous: it may be a scribal error for 'σχολικὴ σύνοψις' or a deliberate repetition for emphasis. The reading taken is that it indicates a scholastic summary.","The clause 'εἰ μὴ καὶ γνήσιον, καὶ τοῦ τῆς βροντῆς ἐπάξιον υἱοῦ' is syntactically ambiguous: it could mean 'if not genuine, then worthy of the son of thunder' or 'both genuine and worthy'. The translation adopts the latter, consistent with the author's defense of authenticity."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":3,"ref":"p3","source":"γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο, μηδὲ τὸ ἔντριτον σπαρτίον κατὰ τὸν Ἐκκλησιάζοντα\nΣολομῶντα ἄρρηκτον μένον οὐ ταχέως διαρραγήσεται, πολλῷ ἃν\nτὸ ἑξάπλοκον. Διὰ τῆς ἀποκαλύψεως οὖν ταύτης δείκνυσιν ὁ Χριστοῦ μαθητὴς,\nὡς καὶ τὸ προφητικὸν καταπλουτεῖ χάρισμα, εἴπερ τῶν \nἐνεστώτων καὶ τῶν παρῳχημένων τε καὶ μελλόντων γνῶσιν τὸ\nμετὰ χεῖρας σύγγραμμα θησαυρίζει· ὣν καὶ πᾶσα ἐγκύμων\nπροφητεία, ὃ καὶ τοῖς παρ’ ἡμῖν θυραυλοῦσιν ἐν λόγῳ σοφοῖς. ἐπεὶ δέ τινες ηὐθαδίσαντο, ᾗ καὶ προλέλεκται νοθείας ἐγκλήματι\nτὸ θεοτελὲς τοῦτο χρησμῴδημα ἀχρειοῦν· παρ’ ὅσον ὁ θεόληπτος \nοὗτος τοῦ λόγου πατὴρ εἰωθὸς αὐτῷ θεολογία σεμνύνειν τῶν θεοπρεπῶν\nαὐτοῦ τόκων τὴν ἐκ βαλβίδος b αὐτῶν, ὡς ἃν εἴποι τις,\nπρόοδον. οὐ νῦν τοῦτο ποιεῖ· περὶ δὲ τὸ κἀς ἡμᾶς πρόσλημμα\nδιὰ φιλανθρωπίαν ἄφατον τὴν περὶ ἡμᾶς, τὸ προοίμιον προσευκαιρεῖ. ἀναγκαῖον ἐκεῖνο ἐρεῖν, ὡς ἀδιάφορον εἰδὼς τὸ περὶ τὸ ἓν \nκαὶ τὸ αὐτὸ ὑπάρξαν τῇ ἀπορρήτῳ ἑνώσει τῶν συνελθόντων\nὁπωσοῦν ἑκατέρως χρῆσθαι· εἴτ’ ἀπὸ τῶν θειοτέρων τοῦ Σωτῆρος\nΧριστοῦ ἀρξάμενον, ἣ ἀπὸ τῶν ἀνθρωποπρεπῶν ἐν τοῖς πρώτοις\nαὐτοῦ γράμμασιν, ἀπὸ τῶν θεοπρεπεστέρω ἀρξάμενος ἐπὶ τὰ\nἀνθρώπινά χωρεῖν οὐκ ἠνήνατο· ἀφ’ ὧν φάσκει “ καὶ ὁ Λόγος \n“ σὰρξ ἐγένετο, ἐν τῷ μετὰ χεῖρας αὖθις συγγράμματι ἀπὸ τῶν\nἀνθρωποπρεπῶν ἀρξάμενος, ὡς ἃν μὴ δόξαι ἀπὸ τῶν θειοτέρων μόνων\nαὐτὸν γινώσκειν, οὐ μέντοι καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων οὐκ ἠνέσχετο\nτοῖς ἀνθρωποπρέπεσιν ἐπαναπαῦσαι τὸν λόγον, ἀλλὰ κἂν τούτοις\nτὰ θεοπρεπέστερα προσνέμειν c οὐ κατοκνεῖ.","english":"For if this were not so, not even the threefold cord, according to Ecclesiastes Solomon, remaining unbroken would not quickly be snapped, much less the sixfold one. Through this Apocalypse, therefore, the disciple of Christ shows that he also possesses the prophetic gift abundantly, since the present writing treasures knowledge of present, past, and future things—of which every prophecy is full, as even those among us who are wise in word but stand outside acknowledge. But since some have been presumptuous, as has been said before, and have sought to discredit this divinely inspired oracle with a charge of spuriousness—insofar as this God-possessed father of discourse is accustomed to dignify with theology the procession, as it were, from the very beginning of his God-appropriate productions—he does not do this now; rather, he devotes the prooemium to the assumption of humanity on our behalf, through the ineffable love for us. It is necessary to say that, knowing it to be indifferent, he uses either manner concerning the one and the same thing that existed in the ineffable union of the natures that came together: whether beginning from the more divine aspects of the Savior Christ or from the human ones. In his first writings, beginning from the more God-appropriate, he did not refuse to proceed to the human; from which he says, \"And the Word became flesh.\" In the present writing, beginning from the human aspects, so that he might not seem to know him only from the more divine, he did not, however, refuse to rest the discourse on the human aspects, but even in these he does not shrink from attributing the more God-appropriate.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"τὸ ἔντριτον σπαρτίον","severity":"info","text":"The threefold cord (ἔντριτον σπαρτίον) alludes to Ecclesiastes 4:12 LXX, where a threefold cord is not easily broken; the author extends the metaphor to a sixfold cord (ἑξάπλοκον), likely symbolizing the composite nature of the Apocalypse's prophetic content.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"καὶ ὁ Λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'And the Word became flesh' is a direct quotation of John 1:14, used here to contrast the Gospel's divine-beginning with the Apocalypse's human-beginning approach.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"νοθείας ἐγκλήματι","severity":"info","text":"The charge of spuriousness (νοθείας ἐγκλήματι) against the Apocalypse reflects early Christian doubts about its canonicity, notably in the Eastern church; the author defends its authenticity by appealing to John's prophetic gift.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"θεοτελὲς ... χρησμῴδημα","severity":"info","text":"Θεοτελὲς χρησμῴδημα ('divinely completed oracle') emphasizes the Apocalypse as a finished prophetic work from God, countering claims of inauthenticity.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"προοίμιον","severity":"info","text":"The author notes that John devotes the prooemium (προοίμιον) to the incarnation (τὸ κἀς ἡμᾶς πρόσλημμα), contrasting with his usual practice of beginning with divine theology in other writings.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"ἀδιάφορον ... χρῆσθαι","severity":"caution","text":"The claim that it is 'indifferent' (ἀδιάφορον) whether one begins from divine or human aspects of Christ may oversimplify the theological tension; the author's defense of John's method is apologetic and not universally accepted.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'τὸ κἀς ἡμᾶς πρόσλημμα' is ambiguous: it could mean 'the assumption of humanity on our behalf' (as translated) or 'the addition to us'; the context of incarnation supports the former.","The reference to 'those who are wise in word but stand outside' (τοῖς παρ’ ἡμῖν θυραυλοῦσιν ἐν λόγῳ σοφοῖς) is unclear—possibly pagan philosophers or heretics."],"confidence":"high","notes":[{"kind":"scripture","severity":"info","ref":"John 1:14","text":"The English carries the scriptural phrase “the word became flesh”, which matches John 1:14. The match is on the English draft; check the Coptic before quoting the verse."}]},{"i":4,"ref":"p4","source":"δι’ ὧν καὶ τῷ ἀνθρωπίῳ d \nτοῦ Κυρίου τὰ ὑπὲρ ἄνθρωπον ἐνθεωρεῖσθαι βούλεται· ὃ καὶ\nΠαύλῳ τῷ θείῳ σκοπὸς ἐν τῇ πρὸς Κολοσσαεῖς e\n“ ἐν αὐτῷ, ” περὶ τοῦ Χριστοῦ φάσκοντι, “ ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα,\n“ τάτε f ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ τὰ ἐπὶ γῆς· πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ ἔκτισται,\n“ καὶ αὐτός ἐστι πρὸ πάντων· καὶ τὰ πάντα ἐν αὐτῷ συνέστηκεν· \n“ καὶ αὐτός ἐστιν ἡ κεφαλὴ τοῦ σώματος τῆς Ἐκκλησίας· ὅς\nἐστιν ἀπάρχη πρωτότοκος ἐκ τῶν νεκρὼν, ἴνα γένηται ἐν πᾶσιν\n b Hinc. inc. Cod. Barocc. c προλέγειν Cod. Bar. d τὰ\nἀνθρώπινόν Bar. e Κολασσεῖς Coisi. f τάτε om. Coisl.","english":"through which he also wishes the superhuman things to be contemplated in the human nature of the Lord; which is also the aim of the divine Paul in his letter to the Colossians, when he says concerning Christ, \"In him all things were created, both those in heaven and those on earth; all things were created through him, and he is before all things; and all things hold together in him; and he is the head of the body of the Church; who is the firstfruits, the firstborn from the dead, so that he might be first in all things.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"τῷ ἀνθρωπίῳ","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'τῷ ἀνθρωπίῳ' refers to the human nature of Christ, a key Christological concept in the commentary.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"πρὸς Κολοσσαεῖς","severity":"info","text":"The passage quotes Colossians 1:16-18, though the wording is paraphrastic and conflates several verses.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Παύλῳ τῷ θείῳ","severity":"info","text":"Paul is called 'divine' (θεῖος), a common epithet in Byzantine exegesis, reflecting his authoritative status.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"transmission","kind":"transmission","basis":"text","lemma":"τάτε","severity":"caution","text":"The apparatus notes that 'τάτε' is omitted in the Coislinianus manuscript, indicating textual variation in the quotation.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"δι’ ὧν","severity":"info","text":"The connective 'δι’ ὧν' links this passage to the preceding argument about the Apocalypse's prophetic scope.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The exact biblical text quoted is not verbatim from Colossians; the author may be paraphrasing or citing from memory.","The phrase 'τῷ ἀνθρωπίῳ' could be read as 'the human' (neuter) or 'the human nature' (masculine implied), but context favors the latter."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":5,"ref":"p5","source":"αὐτὸς πρωτεύων. ἡ προσληφθεῖσα γὰρ αὐτῷ g σὰρξ ἐψυχωμένη\nνοερῶς, ἵν ἐκ δύο φύσεων ἀσυγχύτως νοοῖτο ὁ Ἐμμανουὴλ,\nσυνημμένων θεότητι καὶ ἀνθρωπότητι, τελείως ἐχούσης ἑκατέρας\nκατὰ τὸν οἰκεῖον λόγον, καὶ τὴν κατὰ ποιότητα φυσικὴν ἰδιότητα\nκαὶ διαφοράν i. οὐ συγχυθέντων k οὐκ ἀλλοιωθέντων τῶν συνδεδραμηκότων,\nοὐδ’ αὖ διαιρουμένων l τῇ ὁλοκληρίᾳ τῶν φύσεων μετὰ\nτὴν ἄφραστον ἕνωσιν. ἵνα καὶ Νεστόριος καταισχύνοιτο, καὶ\nΕὐτυχὴς συναπόλοιτο m. ἀλλ’ ὅπως μὲν ᾖ τὸ περὶ τοῦ Σωτῆρος n\nἐν τοῖς ἄλλοις θείοις ἀκριβὲς καὶ ἀπεξεσμένον δόγμα, ἐνδιατρίψας\nὡς εἴρηται ἐνταῦθα τοῖς ἀνθρωπίνοις κατεχρήσατο ῥήμασιν· πλὴν \nοὔτε τὰ θεῖα τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων ἀπήλλακται, οὐκ ἔμπαλιν τὰ\nἀνθρώπινα τῶν θείων, κατὰ τὸ μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ ἧττον ἡ χρῆσις\nπρόεισιν. \n g αὐτῶ om. Bar. h ὁ om. Bar. i ἀναφορὰν Bar. k\nσυγχυσθέντων Coisl. l διῃρημένων Bar. m συναπόλλοιτο Codd.\nn τὸ π. τ. σωτ. ἀκριβὲς καὶ ἀπεξεσ. δόγμ’. ἐν τ. ἀλλ’. θ. Bar.","english":"himself preeminent. For the flesh assumed by him, ensouled with intellect, so that Emmanuel might be conceived without confusion from two natures, divinity and humanity being united, each existing perfectly according to its own principle, and preserving the natural qualitative property and difference; the elements that have come together being neither confused nor altered, nor yet divided in the integrity of the natures after the ineffable union. So that Nestorius might be put to shame, and Eutyches perish along with him. But as to how the precise and polished doctrine concerning the Savior in the other divine writings is, having dwelt here, as has been said, on human matters, he made use of human words; yet neither are the divine things separated from the human, nor conversely the human from the divine, but the usage proceeds according to more and less.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"σὰρξ ἐψυχωμένη νοερῶς","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'flesh ensouled with intellect' reflects the Christological formula that Christ's human nature is animated by a rational soul, a standard anti-Apollinarian position.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Νεστόριος ... Εὐτυχὴς","severity":"info","text":"Nestorius and Eutyches represent the two extreme Christological heresies: Nestorius separates the natures, Eutyches confuses them. The author condemns both to affirm Chalcedonian orthodoxy.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"ἵνα ... καταισχύνοιτο, καὶ ... συναπόλοιτο","severity":"info","text":"The purpose clause 'so that Nestorius might be put to shame, and Eutyches perish along with him' serves as a rhetorical climax, summarizing the anti-heretical aim of the preceding Christological exposition.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"τὸ περὶ τοῦ Σωτῆρος ... δόγμα","severity":"info","text":"The author claims that the precise doctrine concerning the Savior is found in other divine writings, but here the Apocalypse uses human words to convey it, a hermeneutical principle echoed in later Byzantine exegesis.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"οὐκ ἀλλοιωθέντων","severity":"caution","text":"The manuscript tradition shows variants: Bar. omits 'οὐκ ἀλλοιωθέντων'? The apparatus notes 'συγχυσθέντων' in Coisl. and 'διῃρημένων' in Bar., indicating textual instability in the negation of confusion and division.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'οὐκ ἀλλοιωθέντων' is absent in some witnesses (Bar.), and the exact wording of the negation of confusion and division varies across manuscripts, affecting the precision of the Christological statement."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":6,"ref":"p6","source":"ἘΚ τῦν Ἄνδρεα Τῶι Μακαριωτάτωι Ἀρχιεπισκόπωι Καισαρείασ\nΚαππαδοκίασ Εἰσ τὴν Ἀποκάλυψιν\nθεαπέσεωσ, σύνοψισ σχολικὴ, παρατεθεῖσα ὑπὸ Ἀρέθα\nἈναξίου Ἐπισκόπου Καισαπείασ Καππαδοκίασ. \n Ἴστεονκ a ὅτι τὴν πᾶσαν πραγματείαν τοῦ παρόντος βιβλίου \nεἰς εἰκοσιτέσσαρας λόγους ὁ μακάριος οὗτος καὶ θεοσυνέργητος\nἀνὴρ, καὶ εἰς ἑβδομηκονταδύο κεφάλαια οὐκ ἀσυνέτως\nτρισσούμενος γὰρ ὁ εἰκοστὸς τέταρτος ἀριθμὸς, γεννᾷ τὸν ἑβδομηκονταδύο.\nὁ δὲ εἱκοσιτέσσαρα b διὰ τοὺς εἰκοσιτέσσαρας\nοὓς ἐνταῦθα ἡ Ἀποκάλυψις ἐχρημάτισεν, ἐλήφθη. οἳ σύμβολον \nβόλον τῶν ἀπ’ αἰῶνος καὶ μέχρι συντελείας εὐηρεστηκότων εἰσὶ\nΘεῷ. ἐτριπλασιάσθη δὲ οὗτος ὁ ἀριθμὸς ἐπὶ τῶν\nοὐκ ἀσκόπως, ἀλλὰ διὰ τοὺς εὐαρεστοῦντας Θεῷ τριμερῆ τὴν\nὑπόστασιν ἐσχηκότας, ψυχῆς, σώματος, καὶ πνεύματος, εἰς οἰκείωσιν\nτῆς παντοκρατορικῆς κατασπεύσαι c τριάδος. περὶ δὲ τοῦ \nθεοπνεύστου τῆς βίβλου, ὁ ἐν ἁγίοις Βασίλειος, καὶ d Γρηγόριος\nὁ θεῖος τὸν λόγον, καὶ Κύριλλος, καὶ Παπίας, καὶ Εἰρήναιος,\nκαὶ Μεθόδιος e καὶ Ἱππόλυτος, οἱ ἐκκλησιαστικοὶ πατέρες,\nἐχέγγυοι πιστώσασθαι. \n a ἰστέον om. B. b εἰκοστὸς τέταρτος Edd. c κατασπεῦσαι B.\nd ὁ ἐν ἡ. ασ. καὶ om. B. e Sic B. om. Edd.\nΟΙKΟΥMΕΝΙΟΥ\nΕΠΙΣΚΟΠΟΥ ΤΡΙΚΚΗΣ ΘΕΣΣΑΛΙΑΣ\nΚΑΙ ΑΡΕΘΑ\nΤΟΡ ΚΑΙΣΑΡΕΙΑΣ ΚΑΠΠΑΔΟΚΙΑΣ\nΣΥΛΛΟΓΗ ΕΞΗΓΗΣΕΩΝ ΕΚ\nΑΓΙΩΝ ΑΝΔΡΩΝ\nΕΙΣ THN\nTOT ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΣΤΟΥ\nΑΠΟΚΑΛΥΨΙΝ.","english":"From the works of Andrew, to the most blessed Archbishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, on the Apocalypse: a scholastic summary, set forth by Arethas, unworthy Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia. It should be known that the entire treatise of the present book the blessed and divinely inspired man divided into twenty-four discourses and into seventy-two chapters, not without understanding; for the number twenty-four, being tripled, generates the number seventy-two. And the twenty-four was taken on account of the twenty-four elders whom the Apocalypse here mentions; they are a symbol of those who from eternity until the consummation have been pleasing to God. This number was tripled not without purpose, but on account of those pleasing to God having a threefold hypostasis—soul, body, and spirit—for assimilation to the all-ruling Trinity. Concerning the divine inspiration of the book, Basil among the saints, and Gregory the Divine in word, and Cyril, and Papias, and Irenaeus, and Methodius, and Hippolytus, the ecclesiastical fathers, are trustworthy to confirm it. Oikoumenios, Bishop of Trikke in Thessaly, and Arethas, of Caesarea in Cappadocia: a collection of exegeses from holy men on the Apocalypse of the Evangelist.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"εἰς εἰκοσιτέσσαρας λόγους ... εἰς ἑβδομηκονταδύο κεφάλαια","severity":"info","text":"The author divides the Apocalypse into 24 discourses and 72 chapters, a structural scheme attributed to Andrew of Caesarea.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"εἰκοσιτέσσαρας ... διὰ τοὺς εἰκοσιτέσσαρας πρεσβυτέρους","severity":"info","text":"The number 24 is derived from the 24 elders of Revelation 4:4, interpreted as a symbol of the righteous from eternity to the end.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Βασίλειος ... Γρηγόριος ... Κύριλλος ... Παπίας ... Εἰρήναιος ... Μεθόδιος ... Ἱππόλυτος","severity":"info","text":"A list of church fathers (Basil, Gregory Nazianzus, Cyril, Papias, Irenaeus, Methodius, Hippolytus) is cited as authorities for the Apocalypse’s divine inspiration.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"transmission","kind":"transmission","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἀρέθα ... Ἐπισκόπου Καισαπείας Καππαδοκίας","severity":"info","text":"Arethas, Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, presents this as a scholastic summary from Andrew’s works, indicating a chain of transmission.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"ἐτριπλασιάσθη ... τριμερῆ τὴν ὑπόστασιν ... ψυχῆς, σώματος, καὶ πνεύματος","severity":"caution","text":"The tripling of 24 to 72 is explained by a threefold hypostasis (soul, body, spirit), but this anthropology is not standard in Greek patristic thought and may reflect a local exegetical tradition.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'θεαπέσεωσ' is likely a scribal error for 'θεοπνεύστου' (divinely inspired), as the context discusses the book's inspiration.","The list of fathers includes Papias, whose works are largely lost; his inclusion may rely on indirect tradition."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":7,"ref":"p7","source":"Ἐκ Τῦν Οἰκουμενίωι τῶλ Μακαρίωι\nΘεσσαλίασ θεοφιλῶσ Πεπονημένων Εἰσ\nἸωάννορ τοῦ Θεολόγορ, Σύνοψισ Σκολικὴ Σύνοψισ\nΔεουσησ οσον κατα Συνοψιν\nΧριστὲ ὁ Θεὸσ σύμπραξον Ἠμῖν a. \n Οτι καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σύγγραμμα ῥάμμα μύησις, τῆς ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐπὶ τὸ\nστῆθος ἀνακλἰσεως b τῆς ὑπερθέου σοφίας τοῦ ἠγαπημένου, ἅτε\nθεοπνεύστου ὃν καὶ ὠφέλιμον ἀναμφιλόγως, κατείληπται· ἀλλ’ οὐ\nτῶν νόθων, ὥς τινες πλάνῳ συγχροτούμενοι πνεύματι ἐληρώδησαν,\nεἰ μὴ καὶ γνήσιον, καὶ τοῦ τῆς βροντῆς ἐπάξιον υἱοῦ. εἴγε πιστέον \nἈθανασίῳ τῷ παμμεγίστῳ, ἐν τῇ ἐκθέσει τῶν κανονιζομένων τῆς\nπαλαιᾶς τε καὶ νέας βιβλίων, τοῖς γνησίοις καὶ τοῦτο ἐγκρίνοντἰ\nἀλλὰ καὶ Βασιλείῳ τῷ θείῳ τοῦτο ἐν τῇ περὶ Υἱοῦ συζητήσει\nσυντόμῳ ἔδειξε, καὶ Γρηγορίῳ τῷ θείῳ τὸν λόγον ἐν τῷ συντακτηρίῳ\nαὐτοῦ λόγῳ· καὶ Μεθοδίῳ τῷ σοφωτάτῳ Ἐπισκόπῳ Πατάρων \nἐν τῷ περὶ ἀναστάσεως· Κυρίλλῳ τε τῷ μεγάλῳ, ἐν τοῖς περὶ\nτῆς ἐν πνεύματ’ προσκυνήσεως καὶ λατρείας αὐτοῦ πόνοις· πρὸς\nτούτοις καὶ Ἱππολύτῳ τῷ Ῥώμης προέδρῳ, ἐν τῇ τοῦ εἰς τὸν\nΔανιὴλ ἑρμηνείᾳ λόγου· καὶ ἄλλοις δὲ πολλοῖς, ἵνα μὴ μακρολόγωμεν,\nοἷς εἰς νόθον καὶ ἀπόβλητον οὐκ ἔδοξεν ἀπερρῖφθαι, εἰ \nμὴ γνήσιον κριθῆναι· οὐκ ἃν τοιούτοις καὶ τοσούτοις ἀκριβασιαῖς\nτοῦτο δοκοῦν, εἰ μὴ τὸ μέτριον αὐτῷ ᾔδεσαν σπουδαζόμενον· εἰ\n a Hoc ProŒmium Œcumenii in Apocal. Commentarii quod\nvulgaverat Montfaucon. Bibl. Coisl. p. 277. ipse descripsi e Cod.\nCoisl. 224. adjecta lectionis varietate e Cod. Barocc. 3. qui initio\nautem mutilus est. b ἀνακλήσεως cod.","english":"From the works of Oecumenius, the blessed Archbishop of Thessaly, beloved of God, composed on John the Theologian: a scholastic summary, a summary of the summary, as much as is in summary form. Christ God, assist us. That this writing is a revelation, from the reclining upon the breast of the super-divine wisdom of the beloved, being both divinely inspired and indisputably beneficial, has been accepted; but it is not among the spurious works, as some, confounded by a wandering spirit, have babbled, unless it is both genuine and worthy of the son of thunder. For one must trust Athanasius the Great, in his exposition of the canon of the Old and New Testament books, who judges this also among the genuine; and also Basil the Divine, who showed this briefly in his inquiry concerning the Son; and Gregory the Divine, in his farewell discourse; and Methodius the most wise Bishop of Patara, in his work on the resurrection; and Cyril the Great, in his labors concerning the worship and adoration in spirit; and in addition, Hippolytus, the president of Rome, in his interpretation of the book of Daniel; and many others, to be brief, for whom it did not seem to be cast aside as spurious and rejectable, unless it was judged genuine; they would not have deemed this acceptable to such and so many accurate judgments, unless they knew the moderate value to be earnestly sought in it.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"Σύνοψισ Σκολικὴ Σύνοψισ","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'scholastic summary, a summary of the summary' indicates a condensed commentary tradition, possibly reflecting the catena-like character of the work.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἀθανασίῳ τῷ παμμεγίστῳ","severity":"info","text":"The citation of Athanasius the Great's canon list (likely his 39th Festal Letter) is a key patristic witness for the acceptance of Revelation in the Greek tradition.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Βασιλείῳ τῷ θείῳ","severity":"info","text":"Basil of Caesarea is cited for his 'inquiry concerning the Son' (likely Contra Eunomium), showing early Cappadocian support for the Apocalypse.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Γρηγορίῳ τῷ θείῳ","severity":"info","text":"Gregory of Nazianzus is referenced via his 'farewell discourse' (Oratio 42), which alludes to the Apocalypse, reinforcing its orthodox reception.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἱππολύτῳ τῷ Ῥώμης προέδρῳ","severity":"info","text":"Hippolytus of Rome's commentary on Daniel is invoked as an early witness, though his authorship of the extant Greek text is debated.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"ἀνακλἰσεως","severity":"caution","text":"The manuscript variant 'ἀνακλήσεως' (calling back) for 'ἀνακλἰσεως' (reclining) introduces ambiguity about the nature of John's visionary posture.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'Σύνοψισ Σκολικὴ Σύνοψισ' may be a scribal duplication or a deliberate intensification; the exact relationship between the two 'synopsis' terms is unclear.","The manuscript variant 'ἀνακλήσεως' vs. 'ἀνακλἰσεως' leaves uncertain whether the text refers to John's reclining on Christ's breast or a 'calling back' of divine wisdom."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":8,"ref":"p8","source":"γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο, μηδὲ τὸ ἔντριτον σπαρτίον κατὰ τὸν Ἐκκλησιάζοντα\nΣολομῶντα ἄρρηκτον μένον οὐ ταχέως διαρραγήσεται, πολλῷ ἃν\nτὸ ἑξάπλοκον. Διὰ τῆς ἀποκαλύψεως οὖν ταύτης δείκνυσιν ὁ Χριστοῦ μαθητὴς,\nὡς καὶ τὸ προφητικὸν καταπλουτεῖ χάρισμα, εἴπερ τῶν \nἐνεστώτων καὶ τῶν παρῳχημένων τε καὶ μελλόντων γνῶσιν τὸ\nμετὰ χεῖρας σύγγραμμα θησαυρίζει· ὣν καὶ πᾶσα ἐγκύμων\nπροφητεία, ὃ καὶ τοῖς παρ’ ἡμῖν θυραυλοῦσιν ἐν λόγῳ σοφοῖς. ἐπεὶ δέ τινες ηὐθαδίσαντο, ᾗ καὶ προλέλεκται νοθείας ἐγκλήματι\nτὸ θεοτελὲς τοῦτο χρησμῴδημα ἀχρειοῦν· παρ’ ὅσον ὁ θεόληπτος \nοὗτος τοῦ λόγου πατὴρ εἰωθὸς αὐτῷ θεολογία σεμνύνειν τῶν θεοπρεπῶν\nαὐτοῦ τόκων τὴν ἐκ βαλβίδος b αὐτῶν, ὡς ἃν εἴποι τις,\nπρόοδον. οὐ νῦν τοῦτο ποιεῖ· περὶ δὲ τὸ κἀς ἡμᾶς πρόσλημμα\nδιὰ φιλανθρωπίαν ἄφατον τὴν περὶ ἡμᾶς, τὸ προοίμιον προσευκαιρεῖ. ἀναγκαῖον ἐκεῖνο ἐρεῖν, ὡς ἀδιάφορον εἰδὼς τὸ περὶ τὸ ἓν \nκαὶ τὸ αὐτὸ ὑπάρξαν τῇ ἀπορρήτῳ ἑνώσει τῶν συνελθόντων\nὁπωσοῦν ἑκατέρως χρῆσθαι· εἴτ’ ἀπὸ τῶν θειοτέρων τοῦ Σωτῆρος\nΧριστοῦ ἀρξάμενον, ἣ ἀπὸ τῶν ἀνθρωποπρεπῶν ἐν τοῖς πρώτοις\nαὐτοῦ γράμμασιν, ἀπὸ τῶν θεοπρεπεστέρω ἀρξάμενος ἐπὶ τὰ\nἀνθρώπινά χωρεῖν οὐκ ἠνήνατο· ἀφ’ ὧν φάσκει “ καὶ ὁ Λόγος \n“ σὰρξ ἐγένετο, ἐν τῷ μετὰ χεῖρας αὖθις συγγράμματι ἀπὸ τῶν\nἀνθρωποπρεπῶν ἀρξάμενος, ὡς ἃν μὴ δόξαι ἀπὸ τῶν θειοτέρων μόνων\nαὐτὸν γινώσκειν, οὐ μέντοι καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων οὐκ ἠνέσχετο\nτοῖς ἀνθρωποπρέπεσιν ἐπαναπαῦσαι τὸν λόγον, ἀλλὰ κἂν τούτοις\nτὰ θεοπρεπέστερα προσνέμειν c οὐ κατοκνεῖ.","english":"For if this were not so, not even the threefold cord, according to Solomon the Preacher, remaining unbroken would quickly be snapped, much less the sixfold one. Through this Apocalypse, therefore, the disciple of Christ shows that he also abounds in the prophetic gift, since the present writing treasures knowledge of things present, past, and future—which is the case with every prophecy pregnant with meaning, even among those wise in word who stand outside our circle. But since some have been presumptuous, as has been said before, and have sought to discredit this divinely inspired oracle with a charge of spuriousness—insofar as this God-possessed father of discourse is accustomed to exalting with theology the procession, as it were, from the very beginning of his divinely appropriate offspring—he does not do this now; rather, he devotes the proem to the assumption of humanity on our behalf, out of ineffable love for us. It is necessary to say this: that he knew it to be indifferent, with regard to the one and the same reality that subsisted in the ineffable union of the natures that came together, to employ either manner—whether beginning from the more divine aspects of the Savior Christ or from the human aspects in his first writings. Having begun from the more divinely appropriate, he did not refuse to proceed to the human; from which he declares, “And the Word became flesh,” while in the present writing, beginning from the human aspects, so as not to seem to know him only from the more divine, he did not, however, refuse to rest the discourse on the human aspects, but even in these he does not hesitate to assign the more divinely appropriate.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"external","lemma":"τὸ ἔντριτον σπαρτίον","severity":"info","text":"The threefold cord alludes to Ecclesiastes 4:12 (LXX), where Solomon speaks of a threefold cord that is not easily broken. The author uses this to argue for the Apocalypse's integrity.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"καὶ ὁ Λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο","severity":"info","text":"This is a direct quotation of John 1:14, the Johannine prologue's declaration of the Incarnation, used here to contrast the Gospel's divine beginning with the Apocalypse's human beginning.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"θεοτελὲς χρησμῴδημα","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'divinely completed oracle' emphasizes the Apocalypse's inspired status, countering charges of spuriousness. 'Θεοτελές' is rare, stressing divine perfection.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"προοίμιον","severity":"info","text":"The author notes that the Apocalypse's proem focuses on Christ's humanity (τὸ πρόσλημμα), unlike the Gospel's divine opening. This structural contrast is deliberate to show Christ's dual nature.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"external","lemma":"νοθείας ἔγκλημα","severity":"info","text":"The charge of spuriousness against the Apocalypse was common in early Christian debates, notably by Dionysius of Alexandria and others in the Eastern tradition. The author defends its authenticity.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"ἑξάπλοκον","severity":"caution","text":"The term 'sixfold cord' is obscure; it may refer to a complex argument or a lost metaphor. The text's logic assumes the reader knows the reference, but it is not clearly explained.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The identity of 'those wise in word who stand outside our circle' is unclear; possibly non-Christian philosophers or heretics.","The 'sixfold cord' (ἑξάπλοκον) lacks a clear scriptural or traditional parallel, leaving its precise meaning uncertain."],"confidence":"medium","notes":[]},{"i":9,"ref":"p9","source":"δι’ ὧν καὶ τῷ ἀνθρωπίῳ d \nτοῦ Κυρίου τὰ ὑπὲρ ἄνθρωπον ἐνθεωρεῖσθαι βούλεται· ὃ καὶ\nΠαύλῳ τῷ θείῳ σκοπὸς ἐν τῇ πρὸς Κολοσσαεῖς e\n“ ἐν αὐτῷ, ” περὶ τοῦ Χριστοῦ φάσκοντι, “ ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα,\n“ τάτε f ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ τὰ ἐπὶ γῆς· πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ ἔκτισται,\n“ καὶ αὐτός ἐστι πρὸ πάντων· καὶ τὰ πάντα ἐν αὐτῷ συνέστηκεν· \n“ καὶ αὐτός ἐστιν ἡ κεφαλὴ τοῦ σώματος τῆς Ἐκκλησίας· ὅς\nἐστιν ἀπάρχη πρωτότοκος ἐκ τῶν νεκρὼν, ἴνα γένηται ἐν πᾶσιν\n b Hinc. inc. Cod. Barocc. c προλέγειν Cod. Bar. d τὰ\nἀνθρώπινόν Bar. e Κολασσεῖς Coisi. f τάτε om. Coisl.","english":"through which he wishes the human nature of the Lord to be contemplated in its superhuman aspects; this is also the aim of the divine Paul in his letter to the Colossians, when he says concerning Christ: \"In him all things were created, both those in heaven and those on earth; all things were created through him, and he is before all things; and all things subsist in him; and he is the head of the body of the Church; he is the firstfruits, the firstborn from the dead, so that he might become first in all things.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"δι’ ὧν","severity":"info","text":"The plural relative pronoun refers back to the preceding discussion of the Apocalypse's prophetic content, linking the superhuman contemplation of Christ to the work's revelatory scope.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"ἐν αὐτῷ ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα","severity":"info","text":"The quotation conflates Colossians 1:16-18, emphasizing Christ as creator and head of the Church, though the wording is not verbatim from the NT; it reflects a catena-like adaptation.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"external","lemma":"Παύλῳ τῷ θείῳ","severity":"info","text":"The epithet 'divine Paul' is common in Byzantine exegesis, underscoring Paul's authority as a theologian and aligning the Apocalypse with Pauline Christology.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"transmission","kind":"transmission","basis":"text","lemma":"τάτε","severity":"caution","text":"The manuscript Coislinianus omits τάτε, suggesting a variant in the transmission of the Pauline citation; the Baroccianus includes it, indicating scribal divergence.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"σκοπὸς","severity":"info","text":"The term 'aim' (σκοπός) signals the author's rhetorical strategy: aligning John's Apocalypse with Paul's Christological purpose to validate its prophetic and theological content.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The exact source of the Pauline quotation is unclear; it may be a conflation of Colossians 1:16-18 with later liturgical or catena phrasing.","The phrase 'τὰ ὑπὲρ ἄνθρωπον' could be read as either 'superhuman aspects' or 'things beyond human nature,' with implications for Christological interpretation."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":10,"ref":"p10","source":"αὐτὸς πρωτεύων. ἡ προσληφθεῖσα γὰρ αὐτῷ g σὰρξ ἐψυχωμένη\nνοερῶς, ἵν ἐκ δύο φύσεων ἀσυγχύτως νοοῖτο ὁ Ἐμμανουὴλ,\nσυνημμένων θεότητι καὶ ἀνθρωπότητι, τελείως ἐχούσης ἑκατέρας\nκατὰ τὸν οἰκεῖον λόγον, καὶ τὴν κατὰ ποιότητα φυσικὴν ἰδιότητα\nκαὶ διαφοράν i. οὐ συγχυθέντων k οὐκ ἀλλοιωθέντων τῶν συνδεδραμηκότων,\nοὐδ’ αὖ διαιρουμένων l τῇ ὁλοκληρίᾳ τῶν φύσεων μετὰ\nτὴν ἄφραστον ἕνωσιν. ἵνα καὶ Νεστόριος καταισχύνοιτο, καὶ\nΕὐτυχὴς συναπόλοιτο m. ἀλλ’ ὅπως μὲν ᾖ τὸ περὶ τοῦ Σωτῆρος n\nἐν τοῖς ἄλλοις θείοις ἀκριβὲς καὶ ἀπεξεσμένον δόγμα, ἐνδιατρίψας\nὡς εἴρηται ἐνταῦθα τοῖς ἀνθρωπίνοις κατεχρήσατο ῥήμασιν· πλὴν \nοὔτε τὰ θεῖα τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων ἀπήλλακται, οὐκ ἔμπαλιν τὰ\nἀνθρώπινα τῶν θείων, κατὰ τὸ μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ ἧττον ἡ χρῆσις\nπρόεισιν. \n g αὐτῶ om. Bar. h ὁ om. Bar. i ἀναφορὰν Bar. k\nσυγχυσθέντων Coisl. l διῃρημένων Bar. m συναπόλλοιτο Codd.\nn τὸ π. τ. σωτ. ἀκριβὲς καὶ ἀπεξεσ. δόγμ’. ἐν τ. ἀλλ’. θ. Bar.","english":"He himself is preeminent. For the flesh assumed by him, ensouled with a rational soul, so that Emmanuel might be understood without confusion from two natures—divinity and humanity—each existing perfectly according to its own principle, with its natural qualitative property and difference; the elements that have come together being neither confused nor altered, nor yet divided in the integrity of the natures after the ineffable union. So that Nestorius might be put to shame, and Eutyches perish along with him. But as to how the precise and polished doctrine concerning the Savior among the other divine matters is, having dwelt here, as has been said, on human matters, he made use of human words; yet neither are the divine things separated from the human, nor conversely the human from the divine, but the usage proceeds according to more and less.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"ἀσυγχύτως","severity":"info","text":"The adverb ἀσυγχύτως ('without confusion') is a technical term in Christological discourse, especially associated with the Chalcedonian Definition (451 CE), which affirms that the two natures of Christ are united 'without confusion, without change, without division, without separation'.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"background","lemma":"Νεστόριος ... Εὐτυχὴς","severity":"info","text":"Nestorius (d. ca. 450) and Eutyches (d. ca. 454) represent the two poles of Christological heresy that the Chalcedonian Definition rejected: Nestorius for separating the natures, Eutyches for confusing them. The author invokes them to position his own orthodoxy.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"external","lemma":"συναπόλοιτο","severity":"info","text":"The reading συναπόλοιτο ('perish along with') is a variant; the apparatus notes that some manuscripts (Codd.) read συναπόλλοιτο (present tense). The aorist optative here likely expresses a wish for the definitive refutation of both heresies.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"ἀλλ’ ὅπως μὲν ᾖ ... ἐνδιατρίψας ... κατεχρήσατο","severity":"info","text":"The sentence beginning with ἀλλ’ ὅπως μὲν ᾖ marks a transition from the Christological summary to a methodological remark: the author explains that the divine writer used human language while dwelling on human matters, yet without separating the divine from the human.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"g σὰρξ ἐψυχωμένη νοερῶς","severity":"caution","text":"The phrase 'flesh ensouled with a rational soul' is ambiguous: it could imply that the human nature of Christ lacked a rational soul until the incarnation, a position associated with Apollinarianism, which the Council of Constantinople (381) condemned. The author may be using imprecise language.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"transmission","kind":"transmission","basis":"external","lemma":"g σὰρξ ἐψυχωμένη νοερῶς","severity":"info","text":"The apparatus notes that Bar. omits the pronoun αὐτῷ after προσληφθεῖσα, and that Coisl. reads συγχυσθέντων for συγχυθέντων. These variants indicate scribal interventions in the transmission of the text.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'flesh ensouled with a rational soul' may be read as either orthodox or Apollinarian; the author's intent is not entirely clear.","The reading συναπόλοιτο (aorist optative) vs. συναπόλλοιτο (present) affects the nuance of the wish for Eutyches' perdition."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":11,"ref":"p11","source":"ἘΚ τῦν Ἄνδρεα Τῶι Μακαριωτάτωι Ἀρχιεπισκόπωι Καισαρείασ\nΚαππαδοκίασ Εἰσ τὴν Ἀποκάλυψιν\nθεαπέσεωσ, σύνοψισ σχολικὴ, παρατεθεῖσα ὑπὸ Ἀρέθα\nἈναξίου Ἐπισκόπου Καισαπείασ Καππαδοκίασ. \n Ἴστεονκ a ὅτι τὴν πᾶσαν πραγματείαν τοῦ παρόντος βιβλίου \nεἰς εἰκοσιτέσσαρας λόγους ὁ μακάριος οὗτος καὶ θεοσυνέργητος\nἀνὴρ, καὶ εἰς ἑβδομηκονταδύο κεφάλαια οὐκ ἀσυνέτως\nτρισσούμενος γὰρ ὁ εἰκοστὸς τέταρτος ἀριθμὸς, γεννᾷ τὸν ἑβδομηκονταδύο.\nὁ δὲ εἱκοσιτέσσαρα b διὰ τοὺς εἰκοσιτέσσαρας\nοὓς ἐνταῦθα ἡ Ἀποκάλυψις ἐχρημάτισεν, ἐλήφθη. οἳ σύμβολον \nβόλον τῶν ἀπ’ αἰῶνος καὶ μέχρι συντελείας εὐηρεστηκότων εἰσὶ\nΘεῷ. ἐτριπλασιάσθη δὲ οὗτος ὁ ἀριθμὸς ἐπὶ τῶν\nοὐκ ἀσκόπως, ἀλλὰ διὰ τοὺς εὐαρεστοῦντας Θεῷ τριμερῆ τὴν\nὑπόστασιν ἐσχηκότας, ψυχῆς, σώματος, καὶ πνεύματος, εἰς οἰκείωσιν\nτῆς παντοκρατορικῆς κατασπεύσαι c τριάδος. περὶ δὲ τοῦ \nθεοπνεύστου τῆς βίβλου, ὁ ἐν ἁγίοις Βασίλειος, καὶ d Γρηγόριος\nὁ θεῖος τὸν λόγον, καὶ Κύριλλος, καὶ Παπίας, καὶ Εἰρήναιος,\nκαὶ Μεθόδιος e καὶ Ἱππόλυτος, οἱ ἐκκλησιαστικοὶ πατέρες,\nἐχέγγυοι πιστώσασθαι. \n a ἰστέον om. B. b εἰκοστὸς τέταρτος Edd. c κατασπεῦσαι B.\nd ὁ ἐν ἡ. ασ. καὶ om. B. e Sic B. om. Edd.","english":"From the works of Andrew to the most blessed Archbishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, on the Apocalypse: a scholastic summary, set forth by Arethas, unworthy bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia.\n\nIt should be known that the blessed and divinely inspired man divided the entire treatise of the present book into twenty-four discourses and into seventy-two chapters, not without understanding; for the number twenty-four, when tripled, generates seventy-two. The number twenty-four was taken because of the twenty-four elders whom the Apocalypse here mentions; they are a symbol of those who from eternity until the consummation have been pleasing to God. This number was tripled not without purpose, but because of those pleasing to God, who have a threefold constitution—soul, body, and spirit—for assimilation to the all-ruling Trinity. Concerning the divine inspiration of the book, Basil among the saints, and Gregory the Divine, and Cyril, and Papias, and Irenaeus, and Methodius, and Hippolytus, the ecclesiastical fathers, are trustworthy to attest.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"transmission","kind":"transmission","basis":"text","lemma":"ἘΚ τῦν Ἄνδρεα Τῶι Μακαριωτάτωι Ἀρχιεπισκόπωι Καισαρείασ Καππαδοκίασ Εἰσ τὴν Ἀποκάλυψιν θεαπέσεωσ, σύνοψισ σχολικὴ, παρατεθεῖσα ὑπὸ Ἀρέθα Ἀναξίου Ἐπισκόπου Καισα","severity":"info","text":"The title attributes the work to Arethas, bishop of Caesarea, as a summary of Andrew of Caesarea's commentary on the Apocalypse, indicating a chain of transmission from Andrew to Arethas.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"εἰς εἰκοσιτέσσαρας λόγους ... καὶ εἰς ἑβδομηκονταδύο κεφάλαια","severity":"info","text":"The division of the Apocalypse into 24 discourses and 72 chapters is a structural feature of Andrew's commentary, with 24 derived from the 24 elders and 72 from tripling 24.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"τρισσόμενος","severity":"info","text":"The verb τρισσόμενος means 'tripled' and explains the arithmetic: 24 tripled yields 72, linking the number of chapters to the 24 elders and the tripartite human constitution.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"περὶ δὲ τοῦ θεοπνεύστου τῆς βίβλου, ὁ ἐν ἁγίοις Βασίλειος, καὶ Γρηγόριος ὁ θεῖος τὸν λόγον, καὶ Κύριλλος, καὶ Παπίας, καὶ Εἰρήναιος, καὶ Μεθόδιος καὶ Ἱππόλυτος","severity":"info","text":"The passage cites Basil, Gregory of Nazianzus, Cyril, Papias, Irenaeus, Methodius, and Hippolytus as authorities attesting the divine inspiration of the Apocalypse, reflecting its contested canonical status in the East.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"ἐχέγγυοι πιστώσασθαι","severity":"caution","text":"The phrase ἐχέγγυοι πιστώσασθαι is ambiguous: it may mean the fathers are 'trustworthy to attest' or 'guarantors to confirm' the book's inspiration, but the syntax is compressed.","cites":[{"key":"ed:tlg4102.tlgX01","label":"source edition: Prooemium Pseudo-Oecumenii In Apocalypsin Commentarii (E Cod.)","url":"https://scaife.perseus.org/reader/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg4102.tlgX01.1st1K-grc1:1"}],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The title's phrase 'ἘΚ τῦν Ἄνδρεα' is ambiguous: it may mean 'from the works of Andrew' or 'from Andrew', but the genitive plural τῦν suggests a collection. The reading taken follows the English draft as 'from the works of Andrew'.","The list of fathers includes 'Γρηγόριος ὁ θεῖος τὸν λόγον' which likely refers to Gregory of Nazianzus, but the phrase 'τὸν λόγον' is unclear; it may be a corruption or epithet. The reading taken identifies him as Gregory the Theologian."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]}]}