| 322 E. A. Zachariadou, ‘Mount Athos and the Ottomans c. 1350–1550’, in M. Angold (ed.), The Cambridge History of Christianity, vol. 5: Eastern Christianity (Cambridge, 2006), p. 155. 324 For a more general survey of Athos under Turkish rule the reader is referred to the chapter on ‘Ottoman Athos’ in my book Mount Athos: Renewal in Paradise (New Haven, CT, and London, 2002), pp. 113–56. 325 C. Patrinelis, A. Karakatsanis, M. Theocharis, Stavronikita Monastery: History, Icons, Embroidery (Athens, 1974), pp. 23–4. 328 Introduction to Icons at the Monastery of Stavronikita Painted in 1546 by Theophanes the Cretan (Athens, n.d.). 329 M. Chatzidakis, ‘Byzantine Art on Mount Athos’, in Treasures of Mount Athos (Thessaloniki, 1997), pp. 21–8 (pp. 24–5). 330 See G. Speake, ‘Janus Laskaris’ Visit to Mount Athos in 1491’, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 34: 3 (1993), 325–30. 334 V. S. Ikonnikov, Maksim Grek i ego vremya, 2nd edn (Kiev, 1915), p. 409, quoted in Obolensky, op. cit., p. 213. 335 Hieromonk Makarios of Simonos Petra, The Synaxarion: The Lives of the Saints of the Orthodox Church, trans. C. Hookway, vol. 3: January, February (Ormylia, 2001), p. 252. But it was not until 1988 that the Moscow Patriarchate formally added Maximos to the calendar of saints. 337 E. Denissoff, Maxime le Grec et l’Occident: Contribution à l’histoire de la pensée religieuse et philosophique de Michel Trivolis (Paris, 1943). Hence the title of Obolensky’s 1981 Raleigh Lecture on History, ‘Italy, Mount Athos, and Muscovy: The Three Worlds of Maximos the Greek (c. 1470–1556)’, published in the Proceedings of the British Academy, 67 (1981), 143–61, which preceded the publication of his book, Six Byzantine Portraits, by seven years. 338 K. Ware, ‘St Nikodimos and the Philokalia’, in D. Conomos and G. Speake, eds, Mount Athos the Sacred Bridge: The Spirituality of the Holy Mountain (Oxford, 2005), pp. 69–121 (p. 74). 340 V. G. Barsky, Travel Diary (St Petersburg, 1793), pp. 296, 300. For Barsky’s two journeys to Athos see further R. Gothóni, Tales and Truth: Pilgrimage on Mount Athos Past and Present (Helsinki, 1994), pp. 73–80, and A. Grishin, ‘Bars’kyj and the Orthodox Community’, in Angold (ed.), Eastern Christianity, pp. 210–28. |
| 243 See P. Meyer, Die Haupturkunde für die Geschichte der Athosklöster (Leipzig, 1894), p. 111 lines 31–2. 244 A comparison may be drawn here with Catechesis 18 of St Symeon the New Theologian. Here the term ξενοκουρτης applies to monks tonsured in another monastery but seeking entry to a new community. Unlike Athanasios, Symeon disapproves of such wanderers and warns that they will always be in a position of inferiority. See H. J. M. Turner, ‘“A Carefree and Painless Existence”? Observations of St Symeon the New Theologian on the Monastic Life’, in Sobornost/ECR, 12:1 (1990), 45n. Turner renders it ‘alien monk’. 245 Iviron 6 in Actes d’Iviron: I, ed. J. Lefort et al. (Paris, 1985) (Archives de l’Athos XIV), pp. 135–40. The fact that these two are witnesses, and not members of the Lavra, is overlooked in a number of the secondary sources (Pertusi, Keller). 246 Iviron 7, op. cit., pp. 141–51. In this document, Arsenios is now Arsenius – not, I think, a significant shift. My geographical comments are dependent upon the notes accompanying the edition of the Acta. 247 On this foundation, see, in addition to the articles cited in note 16: L. Bonsall, ‘The Benedictine Monastery of St Mary on Mount Athos’, ECR 2 (1969), 262–7; O. Rousseau, ‘L’ancien monastère bénédictin du Mont Athos’, Revue liturgique et monastique (1929), 531–47; A. Keller, Amalfion: Western Rite Monastery on Mount Athos (Austin, TX, 1994–2002). More on the ‘imperial’ designation below. 249 Ed. B. Martin-Hisard, REB 49 (1991), 67–142. Chapter 27 (109–10) deals with this episode. Tamara Grdzelidze has recently produced a fine English translation, Georgian Monks on Mount Athos: Two Eleventh-Century Lives of the Hegoumenoi of Iviron (London, 2009). 250 See M. Balard, ‘Amalfi et Byzance (Xe–XIIe siècles)’, in Travaux et Mémoires, 6 (1976), 85–95. 253 Lavra 9, in Actes de Lavra: I, ed. P. Lemerle et al. (Paris, 1970), pp. 118–22. Further references to the Athonite acta concerning this monastery can be sourced in the following articles: A. |
| 224 On this point, see especially John Helgeland, Robert J. Daly and J. Patout Burns, Christians and the Military: The Early Experience (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985); but see also the critical observations of David G. Hunter, ‘The Christian Church and the Roman Army in the First Three Centuries,’ in The Church’s Peace Witness, ed. Marlin E. Miller and Barbara Nelson Gingerich (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1994) 161–81. 226 Originally in The Orthodox Church (the newspaper of the Orthodox Church in America), reprinted in his Witness to the World (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1987) 92. On the intimate connections between justice and peace and their significance for ecumenism, see the inter-Orthodox statement “Orthodox Perspectives on Justice and Peace,” in Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation: Insights from Orthodoxy, ed. Gennadios Limouris (Geneva: WCC Publications, 1990) 16–27. 227 Cited in Harakas, “The Morality of War,” in Orthodox Synthesis: The Unity of Theological Thought, Joseph Allen, ed., St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, Crestwood, NY, 1981, pp. 67–94. 260 3 rd canon of the 4 th Ecumenical Council; 10 th Canon of the 7 th Ecumenical Council. 269 In English, three volumes are of particular interest: Louis J. Swift, The Early Fathers on War and Military Service, Vol. 19; 1983 and Peter C. Phan, Social Thought, Vol. 20, 1984, in the series Message of the Fathers of the Church, Wilmington, DE. See also the study, by John Helgeland, Robert J. Daly, and S. Patout Burns, Christians and the Military: The Early Experience, Philadelphia, 1985. 270 I am here closely following Gerhard von Rad and Werner Foerster, in Gerhard Kittel, ed.: Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Vol. 11. Tr. Geoffrey W. Bromiley, Grand Rapids, 1964, pp. 400–420. 273 Stanley Harakas, Toward Transfigured Life: The Theoria of Eastern Orthodox Ethics, Minneapolis, 1983, chapter 7. 293 A few representative titles in English are: Cecil J. Cadoux, The Early Christian Attitude to War, Oxford, 1919; The Early Church and the World. A History of the Christian Attitude to Pagan Society and the State down to the Time of Constantinius, Edinburgh, 1925; C. E. Caspary, Politics and Exegesis: Origen and the Two Swords. Berkeley, 1979; H. A. Deane, The Political and Social Ideas of St. Augustine. New York, 1963; A. von Harnack, Militia Christi: The Christian Religion and the Military in the First Three Centuries. Philadelphia, 1980; G. Zampaglione, The Idea of Peace in Antiquity. Notre Dame, 1973. |
| 212 The Challenge of Peace: God’s Promise and Our Response (Washington, DC: United States Catholic Conference Office of Publishing Services, Publication No. 863, 1983) p. 3. 213 “Reflections on a Kainotic History: Basil of Caesarea as a Paradigm for Ecumenical Dialogue,” in Faith to Creed: Ecumenical Perspectives on the Affirmation of the Apostolic Faith in the Fourth Century, ed. S. Mark Heim (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1991) 104–105. 214 See Alexander F. C. Webster, “Varieties of Christian Military Saints: From Martyrs Under Caesar to Warrior Princes,” St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 24 (1980) 3–35. 216 “No ‘Rumors of War’ in the Greek Fathers,” American Orthodoxy 2 (Winter 1992) 8–9. The author would like to express his deep gratitude to Fr. Harakas, who originally had been scheduled to speak at the NCC Faith and Order consultation on “The Fragmentation of the Church and Its Unity in Peacekeeping,” for generously sharing with him his thoughts as well as copies of his many ar- ticles on the subject of peace. 217 Cf. his reflections in “The Morality of War,” in Orthodox Synthesis: The Unity of Theological Thought, ed. Joseph J. Allen (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1981) 67–94. 218 “No ‘Rumors of Wars’ …” 8. Cf. Fr. Harakas’ essay “The NCCB Pastoral Letter: ‘The Challenge of Peace’ – An Eastern Orthodox Response,” in Peace in a Nuclear Age: The Bishops’ Pastoral Letter in Perspective, ed. Charles J. Reid, Jr. (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1986) chapter 16. 219 “The Teaching on Peace in the Fathers,” in Un Regard Orthodoxe sur la Paix (Chambésy-Geneva: Editions du Centre Orthodoxe du Patriarcat Œcuménique, 1986) 32–47 at p. 43. 220 Raimundus de Agiles, quoted in H.J. Muller, Freedom in the Western World (New York, Evanston and London: Harper and Row, 1963) 48. 223 See, for example, John Howard Yoder, “The Authority of Tradition,” in The Priestly Kingdom: Social Ethics as Gospel (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1984) 63–79; cf. also A. James Reimer, “Trinitarian Orthodoxy, Constantinianism, and Theology from a Radical Protestant Perspective,” in Faith to Creed … 129–61 and the literature analyzed there. |
| 204 Pritchard, op. cit. (1975), p. 107, col. 11:2629. For additional comments on the Adadguppi’ inscription, see the Appendix for Chapter 3. 205 p. 107. Until the last column (III 5ff), the Adadguppi’ stele is written in the first person. But it is evident that the inscription was chiselled out after her death, undoubtedly by order of Nabonidus. That is why Dr. T. Longman III would like to classify it as a “fictional autobiography” (a literary method known also from other Akkadian texts), although he adds: “This, however, does not mean that the events and even the opinions associated with Adadguppi’ are unauthentic.” (Tremper Longman III, Fictional Akkadian Autobiography, Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 1991, pp. 41, 101, 102, 209, 210; cf. Beaulieu, op. cit., p. 209.) But it is questionable if the Adadguppi’ inscription, even in this sense, can be classified as a “fictional autobiography” In his review of Longman’s work Dr. W. Schramm points out that the text “essentially is a genuine autobiography. The fact that there is an addition in col. Ill 5ff. composed by Nabonidus (so already Gadd, AnSt 8, 55, on III 5), does not give anyone the right to regard the whole text as fictional. The inscription, of course, was chiselled out after the death of Adadguppi’. But it cannot be doubted that an authentic Vorlage on the story of Adadguppi’s life was used ‘–Bibliotheca Orientalis, Vol. LII, No. 1/2 (Leiden, 1995), p.94. 206 Canon, of course, does not give the reigns of the Assyrian kings Ashurbanipal and Ashuretilili. For the earliest period (747539 B.C.E.) the Canon gives a kinglist for Babylon, not for contemporary Assyria. The reigns of Assyrian kings are given only in so far as they also ruled directly over Babylon, which was true, for example, of Sennacherib, who ruled over Babylon twice (in 704/03–703/02 and 688/87–681/80 B.C.E.), and of Esarhaddon, who ruled over Babylon for thirteen years (680/79668/67 B.C.E.). For the period of Ashurbanipal’s reign in Assyria, the Canon gives the reigns of the contemporary vassal kings in Babylon, Shamashshumukin (20 years) and Kandalanu (22 years).–Compare Gadd, op. cit., pp. 70, 71. |
| 212 of course, defenders of the Watch Tower Society’s chronology have made great efforts to discredit the evidence provided by these enormous quantities of dated cuneiform tablets. On perusing modern catalogues of documents dated to the NeoBabylonian era, they have found a few documents that seemingly give longer reigns to some Babylonian kings than are shown by the Royal Canon and other sources. A fresh check of the original tablets, however, has shown that most of these odd dates simply are modern copying, transcription, or printing errors. Some other odd dates are demonstrably scribal errors. For a detailed discussion of these texts, see Appendix for chapter 3: “Some comments on copying, reading, and scribal errors” 213 New World Dictionary, 3rd college edition, eds. V. Neufeldt & D. B. Guralnik (New York: Webster’s New World Dictionaries, 1988), p. 1080. 214 For a survey of the NeoBabylonian archives, see M. A. Dandamaev’s article in Cuneiform Archives and Libraries, ed. K. R. Veenhof (Leiden: Nederlands HistorischArchaeologisch Instituut te Istanbul, 1986), pp. 273277. 216 the Canon of Ptolemy,” in Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archaeology, Vol. VI (London, January 1878), pp. 178. As Boscawen points out (ibid., pp. 5, 6), George Smith himself, during his stay at Baghdad in 1876, had begun a systematic and careful examination of the tablets, a study that was interrupted by his untimely death in Aleppo in August that year. Boscawen’s study was evidently based on Smith’s notebooks. – Sheila M. Evers, “George Smith and the Egibi Tablets,” Iraq, Vol. LV, 1993, pp. 107117. 218 pp. 9, 10. Shula died between the dates VII/21/23 (month/day/year) and IV/15/24 of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign (between October, 582 and July, 581 B.C.E.). – G. van Driel, “The Rise of the House of Egibi,” Jaarbericht van het VooraziatischEgyptisch Genootschap, No. 29 (Leiden, 1987), p. 51. 219 evidently died in the thirteenth year of Nabonidus, the year after his son had taken over the affairs. See Arthur Ungnad, “Das Haus Egibi,” Archiv fur Orientforschung, Band XIV (Berlin, 1941), p. 60, and van Driel, op. cit., pp. 66, 67. |
| 5724 Manns, «Fête.» 5725 Bruce, Documents, 49; cf. Fenton, John, 67. On rabbinic development of that feast, see, e.g., Adler, «Rosh Hashanah.» 5726 Jub. 16:27; m. Git. 3:8; b. B. Mesi c a 28a (Tannaitic attribution); Sukkah 33b; Pesah. 34b (in 36a it is Pesach, but this is clear from the context); p. Git. 3:8, §4; Gen. Rab. 6:5, 35:3; Safrai, «Temple,» 894. Tabernacles was one of the most prominent feasts (Josephus Ant. 8.100). 5727 Brown, John, 1:206; cf. Yee, «Sabbath.» If John added the Sabbath to the original story (Meier, Marginal Jew, 2:681), the emphasis becomes all the clearer. 5728 See Yee, Feasts, 46–47. 5729 On John " s topographic accuracy, see, e.g., Hunter, «Trends»; Dunn, «John,» 299. 5730 Perkins, «John,» 959. 5731 βραστ is a typically Johannine way of citing Hebrew (5:2; 19:13,17,20; 20:16; Rev 9:11; 16:16; cf. John 1:38 ); Luke and Paul prefer βρας (Acts 6:1; 21:40; 22:2; 26:14; 2Cor 11:22 ; Phil 3:5 ; cf. also 4 Macc 12:7; 16:15). 5732 On the probability of this reading, see Wieand, «Bethesda,» 394–95; Vardaman, «Bethesda,» 29; Cullmann, Worship, 84–85 n. 2; Finegan, Archeology, 143; Wolters, «Copper Scroll» (citing 3Q15 11.12). Cf. the site near the temple in Josephus War 2.328. For the meaning, related to «pools,» see Görg, «Beckenhausen.» 5733 Cf. similarly Selkin, «Exegesis,» 188–89. 5734 For problems with the St. Annés site (as well as other proposed sites), see Selkin, «Exegesis,» 175–79. 5735 Wieand, «Bethesda,» 396–97; Vardaman, «Bethesda,» 28; Cornfeld, Josephus, 338,364; Finegan, Archeology, 145. An allegorical connection between the sheep pool and Jesus» «sheep» (10:1) is unlikely, given the proximity of the pool to Bethesda; on the sheep pool, Finegan, Archeology, 142–43. 5736 Yamauchi, Stones, 104. The term κολυμβθρα suggests a deep pool (Bernard, John, 1:226). 5737 Vardaman, «Bethesda,» 28. The view of some (e.g., Bruns, Art, 65; Ellis, Genius, 88; more skillfully, Selkin, «Exegesis,» 196) that they symbolize the five books of the Law seems to allegorize unnecessarily, despite references to the Law later in the chapter. |
| Finally, Furuli’s hypothesis is selfcontradictory. If it were true that the planetary positions “represent backward calculations by an astrologer who believed that 568/67 was year 57 of Nebuchadnezzar II,” and if it were true that “the original tablet that was copied in Seleucid times was made in 588/87,” which Furuli argues was the 37 th year of Nebuchadnezzar, then the astrologer/copyist must have dated the tablet to the 37 th year of Nebuchadnezzar from the very beginning! No modern manipulation of the date would then have been necessary. Furuli’s hypothesis is simply untenable. The only reason for his suggesting it is the desperate need to get rid of a tablet that inexorably demolishes his “Oslo [=Watchtower] chronology” and firmly establishes the absolute chronology for the reign of Nebuchadnezzar II (604562 BCE). As discussed in chapter 4 of my book The Gentile Times Reconsidered (Atlanta: Commentary Press, 2004), there are at least nine other astronomical tablets that perform the same service. Furuli’s futile attempts to undermine the enormous burden of evidence provided by these other astronomical tablets will be discussed in another, separate part of this review. The question that remains to be discussed here is Furuli’s claim that the lunar positions that were observed in the 37 th year of Nebuchadnezzar and are recorded on VAT 4956 fit the year 588/587 better than 568/567 BCE. DO THE LUNAR POSITIONS RECORDED ON VAT 4956 FIT 588/587 BETTER THAN 568/567 BCE? On the back cover of his new book Rolf Furuli states that the conclusion of his study is that “the lunar data on the tablet [VAT 4956] better fit 588 than 568 B.C.E., and that this is the 37 th year of Nebuchadnezzar II.” What about this claim? A careful examination of all the legible lunar positions recorded on this astronomical “diary” proves that the claim is false. Almost none of the lunar positions recorded on VAT 4956 fit the year 588/587 BCE, while nearly all of them excellently correspond to lunar positions in the year 568/567 BCE. |
| History of Dogma. Boston, 1901. Vol. 2. P. 313-316; idem. Novatian, Novatianism//The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge/Ed. S. M. Jackson. Grand Rapids (Mich.), 1910. Vol. 8. P. 197-202; Hermann Th. Das Verhältnis von Novatians «De Trinitate» zu Tertullians «Adversus Praxean»: Diss. Marburg, 1918; D " Al è s A. Le corpus de Novatien//RechSR. 1919. Vol. 10. P. 293-323; idem. Novatien moraliste//RQH. Ser. 3. 1923. T. 3. P. 5-37; idem. Novatien: Étude sur la théologie romaine au milieu du IIIe siècle. P., 1924; D ö lger F. J. Die Taufe des Novatian//Antike und Christentum. Münster, 1930. Bd. 2. S. 258-267; idem. Zum Oikiskos des Novatian: Klausnerhäuschen oder Versteck?//Ibid. 1941/1950. Bd. 6. S. 61-64; Amann É . Novatien et Novatianisme//DTC. 1931. T. 11. Col. 816-849; Kriebel M. Studien zur älteren Entwicklung der abendländischen Trinitätslehre bei Tertullian und Novatian: Diss. Marburg, 1932; Kleibach G. Divinitas Filii ejusque Patri subordinatio in Novatiani libro De Trinitate//Bogoslovska Smotra. Zagreb, 1933. Vol. 21. N 3. P. 193-224; Koch H. Novatian// Pauly, Wissowa. R. 1. 1936. Bd. 17. Hbd. 33. Sp. 1138-1156; idem. La lingua e lo stilo di Novaziano//Religio. R., 1937. Vol. 13. P. 278-294; idem. Il martire Novaziano//Ibid. 1938. Vol. 14. P. 192-198; Eynde D., van den. L " inscription sépulcrale de Novatien//RHE. 1937. Vol. 33. P. 792-794; Mohlberg L. C. Osservazioni storico-critiche sulla iscrizione tombale di Novaziano//EphLit. 1937. Vol. 51. P. 242-249; Casamassa A. Gli scrittori cristiani dell " Occidente nel III secolo: II. Novaziano. R., 1948; Mohrmann C. Les origins de la latinité chrétienne à Rome//VChr. 1949. Vol. 3. N 2. P. 67-106; N 3. P. 163-183; Daly C. B. Novatian and Tertullian: A Chapter in the History of Puritanism//Irish Theol. Quarterly. Maynooth, 1952. Vol. 19. N 1. P. 33-43; Dekkers E. Note sur les fragments récemment découverts de Tertullien//Sacris erudiri. Turnhout, 1952. Vol. 4. P. 372-383; Frutaz A. P. Novaziano, cimitero detto di//EC. |
| The preceding discussion of the Society’s fruidess attempts to establish a secular basis for its particular “Bible chronology” epitomizes the content of a booklet published in 1981, The Watch Tower Society and Absolute Chronology. 140 Perhaps it was this exposure that – directly or in directlyin cited the Society’s writers to make another attempt to establish the 539 B.C.E. date. At any rate, a new discussion of the date was published in 1988 in the Society’s revised Bible dictionary. Insight on the Scriptures, in which the authors now try to fix the date astronomically. As explained earlier (in footnote 2 chronology is usually best established with the assistance of astronomicallyfixed dates. In the 1870s and 1880s, excavations in Babylonia unearthed a great number of cuneiform texts containing descriptions of astronomical events dating from the Babylonian, Persian and Greek eras. These texts provide numerous absolute dates from these periods. The most important astronomical text from the NeoBabylonian era is a socalled astronomical “diary,” a record of about thirty astronomical observations dated to the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar. This tablet, which is kept in the Berlin Museum (where it is designated VAT 4956), establishes 568/67 B.C.E. as the absolute date for the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar. This date obviously implies that his 18th year, during which he desolated Jerusalem, corresponds to 587/86 B.C.E. That is 20 years later than the 607 B.C.E. date assigned to that event by the Watch Tower Society. A detailed discussion of this and other astronomical texts is given in chapter four. The Watch Tower Society’s concern, then, is somehow to bypass the use of any such unfavorable ancient text and find a way to establish the date of 539 B.C.E. independently of it, thereby avoiding conflict with the corollary evidence the text supplies that undermines a 607 B.C.E. date for Jerusalem’s fall. To what astronomical evidence do they resort? Strm. Kambys. 400: The astronomical text, designated Strm. Kambys. 400, is the text now used by the Watch Tower Society to establish the 539 B.C.E. date. It is a tablet dated to the seventh year of Cambyses, the son of Cyrus. 141 Referring to two lunar eclipses mentioned in the text – eclipses which modern scholars have “identified with the lunar eclipses that were visible at Babylon on July 16, 523 B.C.E., and on January 10, 522 B.C.E.,” – the Society concludes: |
|
|
