THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA: AN ARIAN COMMENTARY ON JOB AND ITS HISTORICAL CONTEXT

You su^er oppression from the Egyptians, you endure sharp agonies from pitiless men, even though you have in no way been proven sinners, nor blameworthy, but rather have been proven and shown to be holy, righteous, perfect men, and deserving friends both to them and their fathers. But though you su^er these things wrongfully from the Egyptians, being reduced to servitude, and punished by them (though) without crime, and unjustly a@icted, do not be disheartened nor succumb. _ For liberation will come to you, as it did to that man (Job) _ If you who ought to have been honorable and rich because of the goodness and wealth of your parents, have been made dishonorable and needy, do not despair, because this above-said man Job was also rolled o^ a royal and glorious seat into a dung-heap.

SO B E G IN S the Commentarius in Iob, a long Latin commentary on the book of Job transmitted under the name of Origen.1 In the passage quoted (375B), Moses was preaching on Job for the encouragement of the captive Hebrews. His speech has little bearing on the circumstances of the ancient Jews, but it hints at Pseudo-Origens own audience, for Pseudo-Origen, somewhat audaciously, uses Moses as the mouthpiece for his contemporary message. He, like Moses, was speaking to a people who understood what it meant to be the governors of provinces (379D), advisers to kings (406A), slave-owners (383D), and the landlords of great estates. But their wealth and power were insecure. Pseudo-Origen implies that they were at war, and having di"culty keeping united in the face of it.2 The identity of their enemy is unclear, but at least some of their di"culties were due to the Nicenes, that trinominalist sect and heresy of the three gods, which has lled the whole world in the guise of shadows, which at times worships the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as though they were three, instead of adoring them as one, with the result that it is called in the Greek language the trinitarian

Pseudo-Origen, Commentarius in Iob (PG 17.371522); CPG 1521. Ps. Orig. 496A: et quod ex maximum cum debuerant unanimiter pro invicem adversus inimicos suos atque adversarios stare, sive intus, sive foris, sive in bello, sive in praeliis, et sibi invicem intendere atque invicem adjuvare, et mutuo amore terga defendere, reperiuntur sibi invicem inimici ac proditores, atque in propriis ruinis gaudentes.
2
# Oxford University Press 2003

[Journal of Theological Studies, NS, Vol. 54, Pt. 1, April 2003]

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 61 or homoousion sect.3 All of these details suggest that PseudoOrigen was writing for an Arian audience whose parents had belonged to the highest social echelons but who were now struggling to keep united in the face of Nicene advances. The mystery is when and where these Arians may have lived. The usual clues to provenance are absent from the commentary. The manuscripts attributed it to Origen, but its Arianism (and a reference to a saint who postdated Origen) makes this attribution impossible.4 Pseudo-Origen mentions no current political events or contemporary names. He is not very forthcoming about his theology: except for his short diatribe against the homoousian heresy, his Arianism might have gone unnoticed.5 Even his original language is uncertain; it is debated whether the commentary was originally composed in Latin or Greek.6 Because direct evidence of provenance is sparse, it is necessary to look for the

3 Ps. Orig. 428AB: trionymae illius sectae, triumque deorum haeresis, quae universum orbem terrae in modum tenebrarum replevit, quae patrem et lium et spiritum sanctum aliquando tanquam tres colit, nonnumquam unum adorat, quemadmodum Graecorum lingua memoratur triadem vel homusion. 4 For the manuscripts, see M. Meslin, Les Ariens dOccident (Patristica Sorbonensia 8) (Paris, 1967), 2013, supplemented by the review of Meslin by P. Nautin, Revue de lhistoire des religions 177 (1970), pp. 7089, at p. 80. For a discussion of why it cannot be a translation of Origen, see Meslin, Ariens, pp. 2069. The saint mentioned by Pseudo-Origen is Lucian of Antioch (d. 310). 5 His rejection of term o moou sioz (428AB) is characteristic of Arians: for example, Arius ap. Ath. syn. 36 (PG 26.757A) and, from Vandal North Africa, Fastid. serm. 2 (CC 91.281). Other signs of his Arianism are his doxology, which only includes the Father: hi requiescunt in perpetuo apud Deum Patrem, cui gloria in saecula saeculorum. Amen (522A); and his veneration of Lucian of Antioch (470D471A), a saint particularly honoured by Arians: see J. Zeiller, Les origines chre tiennes dans les provinces Danubiennes de lEmpire Romain (Paris, 1918), p. 503. His tendency to emphasize Jesus human weakness is also signicant. For example, he says that the Unigenitus, when he came to earth, was not able to tolerate direct contact with divinity: Si enim cum ad terras veniret Unigenitus, Deitatis in se virtutem atque accessum non sustinens, ne torqueretur, rogavit quomodo ad incorruptionem accedens, ante illam intolerabilem atque inaccessibilem Dei faciem stabit (403A), and that Jesus, when he asked that this cup be taken from him, was showing human fear (515C). 6 On the Latin side, see Zeiller, Origines chre tiennes, pp. 5025; Meslin, Ariens, pp. 2069; and M. Simonetti, Patrologia, vol. 3, ed. Angelo di Berardino (Torino, 1978), p. 95. On the Greek side are D. Huet, Origenianorum appendix II. De tribus libris in Iob (PG 17.1274); L. Dieu, Le texte du Job du Codex Alexandrinus et ses principaux te on 13 (1912), pp. 22374, at pp. 2245; and moins, Le Muse D. Hagedorn, Der Hiobkommentar des Arianers Julian (Patristische Texte und Studien 14) (Berlin, 1973), pp. lxxivv, n. 9. For recent overview of this scholarship, see E. Dassmann, Hiob, Reallexikon fu r Antike und Christentum 15 (Stuttgart, 1991), pp. 366442, at pp. 3956.

62 LESLIE DOSSEY indirectthe authors scriptural tradition, his style of exegesis, and other hidden clues as to when and where he wrote. M. Meslin has made the most energetic attempt to identify the commentarys author, arguing for the fth-century Arian bishop, Maximinus.7 Maximinus held a public debate with Augustine of Hippo around 427/28. He was probably the same Arian bishop as the Illyrian Maximinus who authored the Dissertatio Maximini contra Ambrosium. Meslin based his identication on little more than the impression that Maximinus and Pseudo-Origen shared a common scriptural tradition, an impression that has proven to be false.8 Meslins attribution of the text to Maximinus failed to persuade anyone,9 but he did succeed in popularizing the idea that the text was originally written in Latin, not translated from the Greek. Recent critical editions of the Old Latin Bible and the Septuagint have raised the possibility of a North African origin. The editor of the Septuagint Job noticed that Pseudo-Origens translation of Job had a surprisingly high number of parallels with Cyprians.10 In the recent critical edition of the Old Latin Isaiah, Pseudo-Origens translation of Isaiah resembles that of late North African authors.11 Because of this, H. Frede in his
7 Meslin, Ariens, pp. 20926. The identication with Maximinus was rst proposed by Erasmus. 8 Meslin, Ariens, p. 221, claimed that the Gospel verses quoted by PseudoOrigen were similar to the Old Latin Gospels in the Codex Veronensis (b) manuscript of the Old Latin Gospels. This was, according to him, also the translation used by the Arian Fragmenta in Lucam (CC 87.199225) and the Homiliae de lectionibus sanctorum evangeliorum (CC 87.745) (both of which he attributed to Maximinus). Neither of these texts is now thought to be by Maximinus, so the argument is mute. My own analysis of Pseudo-Origens Gospels does not show any particular similarity to the Codex Veronensis, nor to the Codex Monacensis (q) (q is the version favoured by Maximinus in Augustines Collatio Maximini, as analyzed by R. Gryson: R. Gryson, Les citations scripturaires des oeuvres attribue que arien Maximinus, Revue es a le ve Be ne dictine 88 [1978], pp. 4580, at pp. 723). 9 For negative critiques of Meslins attribution, see Nautin, Revue de lhistoire des religions 177 (1970), pp. 801; M. Simonetti, Rivista di storia e letteratura religiosa 4 (1968), pp. 563571, p. 569; and Simonetti, Patrologia 3, p. 93. 10 J. Ziegler, Introduction to Iob, ed. J. Ziegler (Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum vol. 11.4) (Go ttingen, 1982), p. 27, henceforth Ziegler, Septuaginta Iob. 11 H. Frede, Kirchenschriftsteller: Verzeichnis und Sigel (Vetus Latina 1/1) (Freiburg, 1995), p. 146: der Bibeltext in Is ist spa tafrikanisch. For the relevant verses, see Esaias, ed. R. Gryson (Vetus Latina: Die Reste der Altlateinischen Bibel 12) (Freiburg, 1987), Is. 1:6; 1:1213; 1:1415; 1:17/1:23; 10:3; 11:5; 14:1214; 23:4; 26:10; 30:6; 35:10; 37:1; 40:67; 50:6; 51:13; 53:45; 53:79; 56:11; 57:11; 59:7; 59:910; 65:1516.

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 63 invaluable Kirchenschriftsteller placed Pseudo-Origen in the middle of the fth century in Vandal Africa.12 E. Dekkers followed him in the re-edited Clavis Patrum Latinorum.13 There has as yet been no attempt to test this thesis by means of an overall examination of the commentary, therefore the need for this article. If correct, the new attribution of the commentary to Vandal Africa is important. Aside from some passages quoted by their enemies, the Arians of Vandal North Africa left no words of their own to posterity.14 Though the Commentarius in Iob is not the stu^ historical narratives are built of, it could o^er some important insights into the mentality of the Arian e lite. It would challenge any persisting notion that the Arian church in North Africa was predominately Vandal. For Pseudo-Origen gives every impression of being Graeco-Roman in culture. He mentions triumphal ceremonies before imperatores (438B), supports partible inheritance among both sons and daughters (385AB), and describes unusual customs of barbarians as someone who, though not hostile, is not one of them (435D). He was a learned man, eloquent in Latin, yet able to translate Greek. His style was intentionally simple enough to be understood by a lay audience, but it nevertheless includes the occasional echo of classical authors.15 Here would be an Arian to rival the learning and perhaps exceed the originality of a Fulgentius, Sidonius, or Cassiodorus. The commentary moreover contains much to interest the social historian. Like the sermons of Augustine or John Chrysostom, this was biblical exegesis written for the edication of laymen, not monks. Its author lled it with advice for everyday life. Of interest to family historians are his defence of the immaculateness of marriage, his injunctions to wives on how to behave to their
12 Frede, Kirchenschriftsteller, p. 146: arianisch, wohl Mitte des 5. Jh im vandalischen Afrika. 13 E. Dekkers, Clavis Patrum Latinorum (Brepols, 19953), pp. 2445 (#707a): saec. v in Africa a quodam Arii sectatore conatus. 14 Fulgentius of Ruspe transmits a sermon by the Arian Fastidiosus: Fastid. serm. (CC 91.2803) and Victor of Vita quotes several edicts of the Vandal king Huneric: Edict. Hunir. apud. Vict. Vit. 2.34, 2.39, 3.314 (CSEL 7.25, 39, 728). In addition to these, R. Gryson has suggested that some of the anonymous sermon and treatises transmitted by the MS Veron. LI (49) come from Vandal North Africa: see G. Gryson, Introduction to Scripta Arriana Latina (CC 87) (Brepols, 1982), pp. xx. 15 Ps. Orig. 496B: ventorum nihilominus spirantium abra, cf. Lucr. 6.4.28 spirantibus incita abris, and Apul. mund. 23 abris spirantium aurarum. Ps. Orig. 506B: quidam autem sternutamentis adhuc observiunt, cf. Cic. de div. 2.40 sternumenta erunt observanda.

64 LESLIE DOSSEY in-laws, and his advice to fathers on how to divide the inheritance among their children.16 The student of popular religion might be interested in his discussion of burial practices, magical amulets, superstitions about sneezing, and curses written on lead tablets.17 For those investigating the late antique moral economy, he speaks of the pure and impure ways to acquire wealth, the value of labour, and the just way to manage large estates.18 PseudoOrigen even provides guidance for politicians by explaining how that well-known dux provinciae Job behaved.19 In short, this eccentric and verbose author would provide a window into the social world of his timewhatever that time may be. There is, however, a good deal of work to be done before this could be considered a text from Vandal North Africa. It is true that the scriptural tradition resembles that of North African authors (and in this article, I will provide more evidence for this). Pseudo-Origens geographical assumptions point to an arid Mediterranean climate like North Africas: camels seem familiar to him (385C, 425A), and when he describes Jobs estates, he emphasizes those crops important to North African agriculture grain, olives, and gs.20 As for placing him in the Vandal period, various circumstantial pieces of evidence support this. The Arians were not an important sect in North Africa before the Vandal conquest, so an Arian with a North African scriptural tradition might be assumed to have lived under Vandal rule. This is especially true for an Arian who, for all his hostility towards the homoousian

16 For his defence of marriage, see Ps. Orig. 382B, 383A, 383C, 429B (see n. 116); for injunctions to wives on how to behave to their in-laws, 383CD; and for partible inheritance, 385AB and 395D. 17 For burial practices, his most intriguing comment is that tombs were sometimes damaged by those who erect them in order to discourage theft: Ps. Orig. 436B (see n. 238). For sneezing, see 506B. For charms on small plates of metal (lamellae) or lead tablets, see 505C, 505D, and 507A. The curse tablets PseudoOrigen is referring to existed in the Latin West at least until the sixth century AD, and longer in the East: see J. G. Gager ed., Curse Tablets and Binding Spells from the Ancient World (Oxford, 1992), pp. 13 and 279 for chronology. 18 For pure types of wealth, see Ps. Orig. 385D386B; for the value of labour, 383D, 388A, 483B; and for how wealth acquired from estates should be used to benet the poor: 386D, 387A, 388A, 419A, 420D, 483B. 19 Ps. Orig. 379C. Pseudo-Origen is unique is giving Job this title: see n. 198. 20 Ps. Orig. 388A: hoc erat quod ab eis thesaurus reputabatur, area et torcular, oliveta et ceta, et universa opera quae sunt in agro. Pseudo-Origen is drawing on Greek exegetes here, according to whom Job possessed elds, vineyards, and olive trees: see p. 80. It is interesting to note that, when directly addressing his audience, Pseudo-Origen replaces the vineyards (not an important part of North African agriculture) with g trees.

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 65 heretics, does not seem to be experiencing direct persecution. Furthermore, the political world envisioned by the commentary better corresponds to the post-Roman period than the fourth, or even early fth centuries, as will be discussed below. So based on his geographical, religious, and political assumptions, Pseudo-Origen could indeed have been writing in Vandal North Africa. Yet the possibility of an Eastern origin needs to be reconsidered. A Greek origin is implied both by the medieval attribution to Origen and by the texts own preface, which claims that this book of the blessed Job has been translated from Greek into Latin (371). Its North African scriptural tradition might be the result of a North African translating a Greek text. This is further supported by the fact that Pseudo-Origen sometimes uses variants of the Septuagint that appear in no other Latin author.21 He seems to regard the Apocalypse of John as uncanonicalan attitude common in the Greek East but almost unheard of in the West.22 The one saint referred to in the text, Lucian of Antioch, is Eastern.23 The only non-biblical place names are those of Eastern provincesSyria, Arabia, Egypt, and Palestine.24 Above all, Pseudo-Origen seems to be drawing on Greek exegesis from the area of Constantinople and Syria, especially the Job sermons of Pseudo-Chrysostom (now attributed to Severianus of Gabala). This paper seeks to prove that despite all of this, Pseudo-Origen was a Western, specically North African, author, although one familiar with Greek exegesis. He was a worthy representative of cosmopolitan outlook of the twilight of the Vandal kingdom.

For Pseudo-Origens Lucianic scriptural variants, see pp. 100102. He never quotes the Apocalypse, even though he quotes almost every other book of the Bible and is very eschatological at times. For the Apocalypse not being accepted as part of the canon in much of the East during the fourth to sixth centuries, see O. Bo r Antike und cher, Johannes-Apokalypse, in Reallexikon fu Christentum, ed. Ernst Dassmann, Lieferung 137 (Stuttgart, 1996), pp. 6323; and J.-B. Frey, Apocalypse, Dictionnaire de la Bible. Supple ment, ed. Louis Pirot, I (Paris, 1928), p. 317. 23 Ps. Orig. 470D471A; BHG 997. Pseudo-Origen gives a version of Lucians passion that is independent of the main Greek lives: compare Philostorgus, Leben und Martyrium des Lucian von Antiochien, ed. J. Bidez, Philostorgius: Kirchengeschichte (Die Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller) (Berlin, 1972), esp. pp. 194 and 197, and G. Bardy, Recherches sur Saint Lucien dAntioche et son tudes de The e cole (E ologie Historique) (Paris, 1936), pp. 1824. 24 Ps. Orig. 385C in regione Arabiae et Palaestinorum; 373C in Aegypto; 435D Syrorum gens.
22

21

66

LESLIE DOSSEY

I . T H E E X E G E T I C A L TR A D I T I O N : P S E U D O -O R I G E N S DE B T T O A N T I O C H Biblical commentaries tend to borrow freely from their predecessors. Therefore the rst step when faced with an anonymous commentary is to search for parallels in other exegesis, both in order to help trace its provenance and in order to distinguish what is original from what is derivative. For the book of Job, a number of late antique commentaries survive. From the Greek East, we have commentaries by Julian the Arian (c.357/65), Didymus the Blind (d. 398), John Chrysostom (d. 407), and Olympiodorus (sixth century), as well as homilies by Severianus of Gabala (d. 430), Hesychius of Jerusalem (c.450) and Leontius of Constantinople (sixth century).25 For the Latin West, there are commentaries by Augustine of Hippo (399), Julian of Eclanum (418/9), the priest Philippus (d. 455/6), and Pope Gregory the Great (595), in addition to a number of Latin sermons on Job.26 The goal of this section is to place Pseudo-Origen within this exegetical tradition. In structure, the text di^ers from the other commentaries in that it only discusses the rst three chapters of Job (Job 13.3), ignoring the far longer dialogue between Job and his friends (Job 3:342:6). There seems to have been a liturgical reason for this.
25 The Greek commentaries I will be comparing are Didymus Alexandrinus, ed. A. Henrichs, Didymos der Blinde. Kommentar zu Hiob (Tura-Papyrus) T. 1 (Papyrologische Texte und Abhandlungen) (Bonn, 1968); Julianus Arianus, ed. D. Hagedorn, Der Hiobkommentar des Arianers Julian (Patristische Texte und Studien 14) (Berlin, 1973); Iohannes Chrysostomus, ed. H. Sorlin with L. Neyrand, Jean Chrysostome. Commentaire sur Job (SC 346) (Paris, 1988); and Olympiodorus, ed. U. and D. Hagedorn, Olympiodor Diakon von Alexandria, Kommentar zu Hiob (Patristische Texte und Studien 24) (Berlin, 1984). The Greek Job sermons are Pseudo-Chryostom, In Iob Sermones 14 (PG 56.563582), now attributed to Severianus of Gabala; Hesychius of Jerusalem, Home lies sur Job version arme nienne vol. 1: Home lies 140, ed. C. Renoux (PO 42.1) (Turnhout, 1983); and Leontius, Sermones 4, 5, 6, and 7, ed. C. Datema and P. Allen, Leontii Presbyteri Constantinopolitani Homiliae (CCG 17). There are also fragments of lteren griechischen Katenen Greek Job exegesis in U. and D. Hagedorn, eds., Die A zum Buch Hiob (Patristische Texte und Studien 40) (Berlin, 1994). I have only compared those sections of the commentaries that deal with chapters discussed by Pseudo-Origen (Jb 13:3). 26 Aug. Adnotationum in Iob, ed. J. Zycha (CSEL 28.2.507628); Iulian. Expositio libri Iob, ed. L. De Coninck (CC 88.3109); Philipp. Commentarius in Iob (PL 26.619802); and Greg. M. moral., ed. M. Adriaen (CC 143, 143A, 143B). Latin sermons on Job include Zeno tract. 1.15 (CC 22.6062); Caes. Arel. serm. 131 (CC 103.539541) and serm. 132 (CC 103.542545); Ps. Aug. serm. 50 (PL 39.18411842); Collectio Escurialensis serm. 14, De Iob, ed. Fr. Leroy, Les 22 ine dits de la cate che ` se donatiste de Vienne: Une e dition provisoire, Recherches augustiniennes 31 (1999), pp. 1714; and Ps. Fulg. Rusp. serm. 70 (PL 65.942943) and serm. 71 (PL 65.943945).

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 67 The narrative of Jobs passion in these rst three chapters was read aloud on days of fasting and abstinence, especially when the congregation was commemorating Christs passion, as Pseudo-Origen himself notes.27 Bishops and priests would deliver sermons on Job, sometimes on successive days. The clearest surviving example of this genre is a series of sermons by Leontius, a sixth-century cleric of Constantinople, who began preaching about Job on Easter Monday and nished on Holy Friday.28 Like PseudoOrigen, he discussed the book of Job line by line and concentrated on the rst three chapters. There are hints throughout the Commentarius in Iob that Pseudo-Origen similarly intended his commentary on Job to be read aloud during a religious festival, possibly Easter Week.29 So the text is something of a cross between a line-by-line commentary and a series of sermons. In exegetical method, Pseudo-Origen concentrates on literal and moral interpretation rather than allegory. Much of the commentary is pure narrative. Pseudo-Origen engages in the kind of preaching that has been termed ctive discourse, dramatizing the speeches of the devil, Job, his wife, Moses, and the other characters of his story.30 In the sections in his own voice, he embellishes Jobs story with details the Scriptures had neglected to mention. For example, when explaining how Jobs three friends
27 Ps. Orig. 374CD. For this liturgical use of Job, see Dassmann, Hiob, Reallexikon fu r Antike und Christentum 15, pp. 4356, and P. Maraval, Job dans `res (Cahiers de Biblia loeuvre de Ze non de Ve rone, in Le Livre de Job chez les Pe Patristica 5) (Strasbourg, 1996), pp. 2330, discussing Pseudo-Origen at p. 23. 28 See C. Datema and P. Allen, Introduction to Leontii Presbyteri Constantinopolitani Homiliae (CCG 17.2327). The Easter reading of Job was not conned to the East. Zenos Tractatus de Iob was sandwiched between Tractatus 1.13 (to be preached on the third Sunday of Lent) and the Tractatus 1.16 for the fourth day of Easter: see Zeno 1.13 and 1.16 (CC 22.52 and 63). 29 An Easter context is suggested by Ps. Orig. 374CD: Similiter autem et in conventu ecclesiae in diebus sanctis legitur passio Job, in diebus jejunii, in diebus abstinentiae, in diebus in quibus tanquam compatiuntur ii qui jejunant et abstinent, admirabili illi Job, in diebus in quibus in jejunio et abstinentia sanctam Domini nostri Jesu Christi passionem sectamur, ut terribilem ejus passionem transeuntes ad beatam eius resurrectionem venire mereamur, compassi nunc ut et conregnemus, condolentes modo in tempore passionis, ut et congaudeamus post hoc in tempore resurrectionis. An Easter context is also implied by the frequent discussion of Jobs life as a type for Christs passion (374D; 474A; 396B; 471B, etc.). The congregation would have been fasting until Easter Sunday: see H. F. Osb, Die Paschavigil als Ende der Quadragesima und ihr Festinhalt bei Augustinus, Archiv fu r Liturgiewissenschaft 9 (1965), pp. 127. 30 For ctive discourse in late antique sermons, see L. Brottier, Actualisation de ` res, pp. 63110, at p. 83, who gets la gure de Job, in Livre de Job chez les Pe the term from J. Kecskeme ti, Doctrine et drame dans la pre dication grecque, Euphrosyne 21 (1993), pp. 2968.

68 LESLIE DOSSEY heard about his misfortunes, he lists the sorts of places where people were gossiping about Jobin the villages, at crossroads, in the main streets of town, and in the porticos of houses (498A). He describes exactly what sort of dung-heap Job was sitting onone near a small fortication (murana) in a public street on the edge of town (502B). When Jobs friends nd him there, he does not make themkings and dukes in their own rightsit in excrement with him, but moves indoors out of a sense of hospitality (502C). The commentary is full of such details, whose only point seems to be to make the story realistic. Pseudo-Origens fondness for literal exegesis sometimes leads him into a sort of historical relativism, unusual in late antique exegesis. His Job was a barbariana Syriac-speaking Arabian dux to be preciseand this accounted for some of his peculiar behaviour.31 For example, Job possessed no horses. PseudoOrigen explained it by saying that what now horses and mules perform, asses used to no less accomplish, especially such asses as exist in the region of Arabia and of the Palestinians, which are swift, similar to horses.32 When Job tears his clothing after learning about the death of his children, Pseudo-Origen explains that this is a barbarian way to wage war: it is the custom among some tribes that whenever they should come to hard battle, tearing their clothing with fury and anger they run against adversaries without restraint, with nude breast, o^ering themselves condently, as do the people of the Syrians.33 So in tearing his clothing, Job was preparing himself for battle with the devil. Pseudo-Origen takes an ethnographic approach to the political organization of Jobs time: In Idumaea, however (that is among
31 For Jobs Syrian language, note Ps. Orig. 373B: quae scripta sunt Syrorum lingua, sive ab ipso Job, sive ab amicis ejus; for his location in Roman Arabia (Idumaea), see 376A and 505A; and for his status as dux provinciae, 379C. In placing Job in Idumaea, Pseudo-Origen is following a common Greek exegetical tradition. 32 Ps. Orig. 385C: Quod enim nunc equi et muli perciunt, hoc nihilominus asini adimplebant, praesertim tales quales sunt in regione Arabiae et Palaestinorum asini, qui veloces sunt similiter ut equi. The absence of horses comes up again on 425C in a military context. It is interesting to compare Pseudo-Origens notion of swift Arabian asses to Jeromes story (derived from Jewish sources) that wild asses (onagri) were bred with horses in this part of the world to produce uelocissimi _ asini: Hier. Hebraicae quaestiones in Gen. 36.24 (CC 72.4445), retold by Isidor. Et. 12.1.57, who attributes the breeding to Ana, a descendent (like Job) of Esau. 33 Ps. Orig. 435D: mos est in aliquibus gentibus, ut cum ad durum praelium venerint, tunc nimirum scindentes vestimenta sua cum furore atque indignatione currant contra adversarios intemperanter, nudo pectore, cum ducia se oerentes, ut est Syrorum gens. He then compares similar customs of aliae barbarae gentes without naming them.

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 69 the tribe of Esau), in accordance with the custom of all peoples, there were kings throughout the cities and regions, as well as dukes of provinces, and individuals reigned and ruled in their own region.34 In these examples, Pseudo-Origen was not trying to discover how the su^erings of Job pregured the struggles of the Church or of the soul. He was rather seeking to understand Jobs specic historical and geographical context, drawing on whatever ethnographic parallels he had on hand. His historical approach did not, however, prevent him from drawing moral lessons from Jobs behaviour. The fact that Jobs sons and daughters feasted for a certain number of days and then stopped shows that they were not drunkards the way people now were: They did not always x their eyes on their goblets and drinking bowls.35 The childrens feasting together also expressed admirable sibling concord; they werent competing for elegance, or struggling for the sake of a kingdom.36 Even the number of children and animals possessed by Job carried lessons for the present. The fact that Job had seven sons and three daughters shows how divine providence has ordained licit and immaculate marriage for humanity (381C). Daughters who are married outside increase concord among families. Sons by bringing wives inside add to the total wealth of the household (383). The number of Jobs animals suggests that a familys property should be distributed equally among children. Job possessed seven thousand sheep and three thousand camels, making a total of ten thousand, enough for each child (male and female) to inherit a thousand animals (385A). In this manner, verse by verse, Pseudo-Origen turns the commentary into a series of sermons on how to live a moral life in the world. It is on these occasions that we learn the most about his contemporary audience. This focus on literal, historical, and moral interpretation places Pseudo-Origen in the camp of Antiochene exegesis rather than the allegorizing exegesis associated with Alexandria (and

34 Ps. Orig. 505A: In Idumaeis autem (hoc est in genere Esau) secundum consuetudinem omnium gentium per singulas civitates et regiones reges fuerunt, atque duces provinciarum, et singuli in regione sua regnabant atque imperabant. He contrasts this to Israel, which had been ruled by one king or judge. He does not, interestingly, compare the Roman Empire. 35 Ps. Orig. 394B: neque semper in calicibus et phialis dabant oculos suos, non erant vinolenti, sicut sunt nunc quamplurimi. 36 Ps. Orig. 384D: Non certaverunt pro elegantia, non litigaverunt pro fortitudine, non contenderunt pro divitiis, non sunt conturbati pro regno.

70 LESLIE DOSSEY subsequently much of the Latin West).37 For the Alexandrians, the words of the Scriptures could have a spiritual meaning quite separate from the historical events represented. For example, Didymus of Alexandria understood the wine drinking of Jobs children according to allegory to mean that they enjoyed theological instruction together.38 In the commentary of Philippus (a fth-century follower of Jerome), Jobs seven sons represented the seven graces of the Church, who, in the feast of the sacraments, dine with their three sistersthe Law, Prophets, and Gospels.39 The sixth-century African Verecundus thought that the house where Jobs children dined stood for the collective kingdom of heresieswith their four corners, ambition, greed, extravagance, and temptations.40 It is not that such types or gures are totally absent from Pseudo-Origen. Job is a type of Christ (474A; 396B; 467B; 471B, etc.), as are the mineral adamas and the phoenix (467A). Jobs seven sons are similar to the seven days of the week (382C) or the seven stars that cross the sky daily (382D); his three daughters are compared to faith, hope, and love (385A). The three columns of horsemen are a type and gure for that trinominalist sect which would later ll the world in the guise of shadows (428A). Yet he indulges in these typologies infrequently, never uses the term allegory for them, and always gives primacy to the literal reading. As in exegesis of the Antioch school, he lets the things or events themselves serve as types, not the mere words of the text.41 His role as an exegete was to understandand never denythe events. The fact that Pseudo-Origens exegetical method might be labelled Antiochene does not in itself mean that he was a Greek. Allegorizing exegesis predominated in the Latin West, but there were important exceptions. Some of Jeromes exegesis was
37 Pseudo-Origens Antiochene method has been discussed by M. Simonetti, Patrologia vol. 3, pp. 956. For the di^erences between Alexandrian allegory and the typology of the Antioch school, I am drawing on D. S. Wallace-Hadrill, Christian Antioch: A Study of Early Christian Thought in the East (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 3245. 38 Didymus, Kommentar zu Hiob 24.2733, ed. Henrichs, 90; discussed by A. Henrichs, Vorwort to Didymus, Kommentar zu Hiob, p. 13. 39 Philipp. in Iob 1 (PL 26.659B). 40 Verecundus, Cant Az. 8 (CC 93.90). 41 This is especially clear in Ps. Orig. 396B, where the Holy Spirit inspires Job to o^er sacrice for his children in order to serve as a type for Christ: Spiritus, inquit, sanctus mihi revelavit, Spiritus sanctus me docuit, ut vitulum pro animabus oeram in guram illius vituli. The Holy Spirit inspired the original actor, not the author or reader of the text.

71 THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA extremely literal, as was that of the late fourth-century exegete of Rome, Ambrosiaster.42 The fth-century Pelagian, Julian of Eclanum, experimented with Antiochene exegesis.43 In the rst half of the sixth century, the African Junillus travelled to Nisibis to learn Antiochene method, and translated a long Greek treatise by Paul of Nisibis.44 Most of these men had been introduced to Antiochene exegesis by actual visits to the East. Such a scenario is not impossible for Pseudo-Origen, as will be discussed below. However, Pseudo-Origen belongs to the Antioch school in more than his methodology; he seems to have had his hands on at least one of their commentaries. He never mentions his sources by name, only implying their existence through asides like we have discovered in the sayings of the ancients (374B), many men have understood and discussed various things about this (word) tempore (474A), or how many-sided the investigation and dispute about this phrase! (426C). A comparison with the extant exegesis on Job shows that he was not getting his information from the other Latin commentaries.45 He has the most in common with Greek commentaries and sermons from the area
42 See D. Brown, Vir Trilinguis: A Study in the Biblical Exegesis of Saint Jerome (Kampen, 1992), pp. 12138 for Jerome; and W. Geerlings, Zur exegetischen Methode des Ambrosiaster, in Stimuli: Exegese und ihre hermeneutik in Antike und Christentum, ed. G. Scho llgen and C. Scholten (Jahrbuch fu r Antike und Christentum 23) (Mu nster, 1996), pp. 4449 for Ambrosiaster. 43 B. Smalley, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages (New York, 19522), p. 16. 44 For Junillus and the dating of his Instituta regularia divinae legis to c. 542, see Iunillus, in J. R. Martindale, The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, vol. 3 (Cambridge, 1992), p. 742. 45 Pseudo-Origen has only a few similarities to Philippus. Job serves as a type of Christ: Philipp. in Iob 1 (PL 26.621C), cf. Ps. Orig. 396B, etc. The fraternal concord of Jobs sons is noted: Philipp. in Iob 1 (PL 26.622C); Ps. Orig. 391C, etc. Moses is the author of the book of Job: Philipp. in Iob 3 (PL 26.624B); Ps. Orig. 373. More surprising is how few parallels occur between Pseudo-Origen and Julian of Eclanum, considering that Julian made use of Antiochene exegesis. I have found only three: Job existed before the law (Iulian. in Iob 1.4, CC 88.5; cf. Ps. Orig. 395C), the dining together of Jobs sons shows fraternal concord (Iulian. 1.4, CC 88.5), and if angels cant stand before God in a physical sense, how much less so the devil (Iulian. 2.3, CC 88.8; Ps. Orig. 401D402S). Pseudo-Origen resembles Augustines Adnotationes in Iob only once: when devil is said to come with the angels before God, Augustine comments utrum quia non potuit nisi per eos audire dictum est cum eis, which can be compared to Pseudo-Origens (and Olympiodorus) point that God must have communicated to devil through the angels: Ps. Orig. 404B, Aug. in Iob 1 (CSEL 28.2.509), also Aug. Sermo 12.7 (CC 41.170). Pseudo-Origens similarities with the historical sections of Gregory Is Moralia are of a common variety: Jobs su^erings serve as a gure for Christs passion (Greg. M. moral. praef. 14, SC 32.162164); the sons feasting together shows undivided sibling love (Greg. M. moral. 1.7.9, SC 32.182); Gods question

72 LESLIE DOSSEY of Syria and Constantinople. His clearest borrowings are from the four Job sermons of Pseudo-Chrysostom. He also may have known Julian the Arians commentary on Job, and at least shared a common exegetical tradition and moralizing purpose with John Chrysostom. Parallels with Pseudo-Origen occur on virtually every page of the four Job sermons of Pseudo-Chrysostom.46 Three of these sermons are now attributed to the Severianus of Gabala (Syria), who moved to Constantinople sometime before 401.47 A strong opponent of Arianism, Severianus is not the sort of theologian one would expect an Arian like Pseudo-Origen to be borrowing from. But in his sermons, he, like Pseudo-Origen, drew on Antiochene exegesis (especially Diodorus of Tarsos) and was fond the sort of ctive discourse that Pseudo-Origen also employed.48 Some of the most striking parallels between the two authors are found in rather supercial descriptive passages. When commenting on Job 1:1, Pseudo-Origen characterized Job as a lily among thorns _ a dove among snatching eagles, as a sheep in the middle of ravaging wolves, as a star in the middle of most terrible clouds; such a man he was, just among the unjust. This is a virtual translation of Pseudo-Chrysostoms remark on the same verse, that Job was a dove in the midst of eagles, a sheep in the middle of wolves, a star in the middle of clouds, a lily in the middle of thorns, a branch of justice in the village of injustice.49 The fact that

to Satan whence do you come was intended to reproach him, comparable to his question to Adam (Greg. M. moral. 2.5.6, SC 32.262; cf. Ps. Orig. 407A and 450C); and the re from heaven makes Job think that God sent his adversities (Greg. M. moral. 2.14.23, SC 32.292; cf. Ps. Orig. 422D). 46 Pseudo-Chrysostom, In Iob Sermones 14 (PG 56.563582); CPG 4564. 47 For a convincing attribution of the sermons to Severianus, see S. J. Voicu, Nuove restituzioni a Severiano di Gabala, Rivista di Studi Bizantini e Neoellenici 201 (19834), pp. 324. 48 B. Baldwin, Severianos, Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, vol. 3 (Oxford: 1991), pp. 18834; J. Kecskeme ti, Doctrine et drame dans la pre dication grecque, Euphrosyne 21 (1993), pp. 2968. 49 Pseudo-Origen 377D (on Jb 1:1) Erat _ tanquam lilium inter tribulos _ Erat tanquam columba inter raptrices aquilas, tanquam agnus in medio luporum diripientium, tanquam stella in medio nubium teterrimararum. Homo quidam erat, justus inter injustos. Cf. Ps. Chrys. In Job 2.1 (PG 56.569) (on Jb 1:1): peristera `e n me sv iera kvn, pro baton e n me sv lu kvn, a stg `r e n me sv tv n me sv tv non e ~ n neQelv ~ n, kri ~n a kanhv ` bla stgma tg ngz e n tg diki mg tg kv az. The lily among thorns ~ n, to ~z dikaiosu ~z a is reminiscence of Cant. 2:12, and the sheep in the midst of wolves of Mt. 10:16. Gregory the Great also compares Job to a lily among thorns, quoting the Song of Songs directly: Greg. M. Moral. 1.1.1 (SC 32.143), commenting on Jb 1:1.

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 73 Pseudo-Origen has added adjectives to Severianus more terse phrasing suggests that he was borrowing from Severianus rather than the other way around. Another similarity too close to be accidental is the way the two authors narrated the deaths of Jobs children. According to the Septuagint, Jobs sons and daughters were dining together in the house of the eldest son, when a wind from the desert made the house fall on top of them (Job 1:1819). Pseudo-Origen and Pseudo-Chrysostom expand on how the childrens body parts were mixed up with the stone and wood of the house, as well as with the food and wine they had been consuming.50 Both note the shameful mingling of male and female body parts.51 Although not a translation, Pseudo-Origen owes a debt to Pseudo-Chrysostom (or a common source) for his imagery in this passage. Pseudo-Origen resembles Pseudo-Chrysostom when explaining the literal meaning of seemingly simple passages. For example, when Job is said to have risen up and looked at his wife, both understand the phrase having looked at her to mean that Job looked at the devil who was speaking through his wife.52 When a messenger reports that re fell from the sky and consumed Jobs sheep and slaves, both authors note that the devil made Job think re came from heaven so that he would believe God was the one attacking him and blaspheme Him.53 Pseudo-Chrysostom and Pseudo-Origen use some of the same arguments to explain away passages that might imply that Job or his children were sinners. When Job curses the day he was born, he is not expressing impiety, because he is cursing his

Ps. Orig. 433C (on Jb 1:19); cf. Ps. Chrys. In Job 1.2 (PG 56.567) (on Jb 1:19). Ps. Orig. 433C (on Jb 1:19): fratrum cum sororibus, et sororum cum germanis omnium comminutio simul cum ipsis antepositis cibis commista est; cf. Ps. Chrys. In Job 1.2 (PG 56.567) (on Jb 1:19): mg pou tv ` me lg kata ` tv rsenikv sg ~ n hgleiv ~ n ta ~n a ~ n diapla melv pou to `a rseniko ` n sxg ` tg lg sunarmoshg z ta az me . ~ n, mg ~ma ei ~z hglei 52 Ps. Orig. 486C: merito justus ille respiciens ad eam, primum ad eum qui in ea loquebatur, id est, ad diabolum, respexit. Cf. Ps. Chrys. In Job 3.4 (PG 56.575): To ` Emble yaz dei ti ou k au tg ` n ble pei, a lla ` to `n e n au tg bleye tv lv o lv b. knusin, o . Ene ~ diabo 53 Ps. Orig. 423B (on Jb 1:16): Non quod de coelo ceciderit ipse ignis, absit, sed quia ita nxit nequissimus, et quia ipsum nuntium ita docuit dicere malignissimus diabolus, ut eum putet beatus Job, atque arbitretur quod de coelo a Deo istae miseriae ei impingerentur, et ut in blasphemiam Dei converteretur. Cf. Ps. Chrys. In Job 1.2 (PG 56.565) (on Job 1:16): Epiba llei [dia boloz] pu j a e ro, ina do jg to ` pu j ou ranou ~r e ~r e ~ katape mpeshai, kai ina nomi ti o heo `z e j ou ranv to ` n polemei sg ` saz, o ~ n au ~, blasQgmg to ` n heo ` n.
51

50

74 LESLIE DOSSEY own day, not God or a creation of God.54 Jobs daughters dine with his sons to demonstrate the chastity of the sons dining, not (as other exegetes suspected) to indulge in any licentiousness or laughter.55 Some of the same gurative interpetations occur in PseudoOrigen and Pseudo-Chrysostom, even though neither author is much given to this sort of exegesis. In Sermon 3, PseudoChrysostom compares Jobs three daughters to the three virtues in 1 Cor. 13:13, as does Pseudo-Origen.56 Both compare Job sitting outside his city to Christ doing the same and Jobs su^erings to those of the martyrs.57 They both think the statement that Job was sine querela foreshadows the injunction that bishops be without reproach (a ne cklgtoz), although Pseudo-Chrysostom, unlike Pseudo-Origen, qualies the statement by noting that being without reproach was not the same as being spotless.58 In addition to these parallels of interpretation, Pseudo-Origen seems to have mined Pseudo-Chrysostoms sermons (or their source) for scriptural quotations, even when he did not agree with his exegesis. The two authors quote (at least) 18 of the same verses from other parts of the Bible to help explain Job.59 In some cases, these verses do not necessarily indicate any special borrowing
54 Ps. Orig. 511A: Job suum maledicebat non diem Dei, non conditionis neque creaturae Dei, sed diem suum, and Ps. Orig. 512D: non maledicebat Deum, non reprehendebat, non blasphemabat, non accusabat. Cf. Ps. Chrys. In Job 4.2 (PG 56.578): ou tou ll e autou me raz katgcorv ` tg ~ n, a ~ n. katara ~ Heou ~ katatolmv ~ kai ~z g ~tai ca ` r, ou tg ` n kti lla ` tg `n e autou me ran. sin, a ~g 55 Ps. Orig. 392D393A: Potationes faciebant, sed non propter ebriositatem, neque pro luxuria, neque pro turpitudine, neque pro intemperantia, neque pro illicitis scurrilitatibus, neque pro desideriosis jocis, neque pro impudicis colloquiis atque obscenis. _ in testimonium purgationis suae atque munditiae germanas sorores suas secum convocabant, ut innocentes scelerum coram patre suo atque omnibus attestarentur. Cf. Ps. Chrys. In Job 2.1 (PG 56.568): Kai ` ti hgke tv delQv `n ` dia prose ~n a ~ n tg ~ sunesti ina deixhg son svQrosu ngz g ne xhg au tv ` sumpo sion, kai ti ou k g asin. , ei z o `o n ~ n to ce lvz a kkexume noz, kai kolasi ` n tra pefan u brifousa, dia ` tou taktoz kai ` e ` a a tg ~to pareisa cei kai ` z parhe nouz eu vxoume naz, ina dei ` pro sxgma tou me hg ` ta jg to ou ou ~ sumposi u brifo menon, a lla ` sumQvni menon. a steQanou 56 Ps. Orig. 385A, cf. Ps. Chrys. 3.1 (PG 56.571). 57 For Christ, Ps. Orig. 471D; Ps. Chrys. 4.2 (PG 56.573); for martyrs, Ps. Orig. 515AB; Ps. Chryst. 4.3 (PG 56.579). 58 Ps. Orig. 379 A; Ps. Chrys. 2.2 (PG 56.569), quoting Tit. 1:56. 59 In addition to verses discussed elsewhere, both authors quote Heb. 12:16: Ps. Orig. 377B for Jb 1:1, cf. Ps. Chrys. 2.1 (PG 56.568) also for Jb 1:1; 1 Tim. 6:7: Ps. Orig. 440D on Jb 1:21, cf. Ps. Chrys. 3.3 (PG 56.575) on Jb 1:21; Ps 13:1: Ps. Orig. 490B on Jb 2:10, cf. Ps. Chrys. 3.4 (PG 56.575) on Jb 2:10; Mt 10:22: Ps. Orig. 398B on Jb 1:5, cf. Ps. Chrys. 3.3 (PG.574) on Jb 1:16; Lcv. 22:31: Ps. Orig. 457D on Jb 2:3, cf. Ps. Chrys. 3.4 (PG 56.575), on Jb 2:10; and Heb. 1:14: Ps. Orig. 387B on Jb 1:3; cf. Ps. Chrys 3.1 (PG 56.572) on Jb 1:6. Both use

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 75 from Pseudo-Chrysostom. It is hard to imagine, however, that the two authors could have independently decided that Ps. 48:21 (homo cum in honore esset non intellexit, comparatus est iumentis insipientibus) lluminated the phrase there was a certain man by name of Job (Job 1:1).60 The clearest instance of PseudoOrigen lifting Scriptures from Pseudo-Chrysostom are the ve verses he quotes to explain Job 1:67 (The angels came to stand before God, and the devil came with them to stand himself before God. And the Lord said to the devil). To demonstrate that the Scriptures do not use words like stand before or say as in the corporal sense, Pseudo-Origen and Pseudo-Chrysostom cite the same examples of Elias standing before God (3 Kgs 17:1) and God speaking to a whale (Jon. 2:1).61 Pseudo-Origen then, like Pseudo-Chrysostom, quotesas a groupPs. 77:49, 1 Cor. 5:5, and 1 Tim. 1:20 to show how devils administer punishment to sinners.62 There is much in Pseudo-Chrysostoms exegesis of this verse that di^ers from Pseudo-OrigensPseudo-Chrysostom believed the devils perform a sort of military service for God, while Pseudo-Origen refuses to admit that God would ever uses evil beings as his agentsbut the cluster of matching quotations is too close to have been arrived at independently. These and other examples63 make it likely that Pseudo-Origen drew on the Job sermons of Pseudo-Chrysostom/Severianus (although the possibility of a common source cannot be discounted). Though numerous, these borrowings do not much a^ect the originality of Pseudo-Origens thought: they are largely conned to his literal, not moral, exegesis, and he changed anything that o^ended his theology. Nevertheless, his borrowings are signicant in several respects. First of all, they would push

Gen. 27:41 to make a similar point about brothers getting along: Ps. Orig. 392B on Jb 1:4, Ps. Chrys. 2.1 (PG 56.568) for Jb 1:1. They quote Jb 31:32 and Jb 29:13 side by side, when explaining how Job used his wealth to benet the poor: Ps. Orig. 386D, Ps. Chrys. 2.2 (PG 56.570). 60 Ps. Chrys. 2.2 (PG 56.569); Ps. Orig. 376C. Hesychius of Jerusalem may have alluded to the same psalm when discussing Jb 1:1. There is a passage attributed to Heschyius in an Armenian catena which says, se disent hommes mais ne le sont pas car ils se sont e gales aux animaux sans raison, comme dit David, as translated by C. Renoux, La cha ne arme nienne sur le Livre de Job, in Livre de Job chez les `res, pp. 14161, p. 155. Pe 61 Ps. Orig. 403D and 406C, cf. Ps. Chrys. 3.1 and 3.2 (PG 56.571 and 572). 62 Ps. Orig. 405C, cf. Ps. Chrys. 3.1 and 3.2 (PG 56.571 and 572). 63 Other exegetical parallels include Ps. Or. 409A and Ps. Chrys. 3.2 (PG 56.573) on the arrogant response of the devil; Ps. Orig. 414C and Ps. Chrys. 4.1 (PG 56.577) on Scriptures changing the words curse God to bless God; and Ps. Orig. 388AB and Ps. Chrys. 3.1 (PG 56.571) on Jobs great works.

76 LESLIE DOSSEY the terminus post quem of the text forward to the early fth century, since Pseudo-Origen would have been writing after Severianus (. AD 400430). Secondly, they indicate that we have here either a Latin author literate in Greek, or a Greek author in Latin translation. These Job sermons, though quite popular in Byzantine homiliaries, were never translated into Latin. A second Greek commentary that Pseudo-Origen may have drawn on is Julian the Arians commentary on Job. Julians commentary was also falsely attributed to Origen, which led to the mistaken belief that our Latin Pseudo-Origen and this Greek Pseudo-Origen were one and the same exegete.64 The Byzantine catenae provide the real authors name, linking certain excerpts to a Julianus, at one point to Julianus deacon of Antioch.65 Little is known about Julian other than what can be deduced from the commentary itself: he was an Arian, probably writing in Syria during the 350s or 360s.66 His commentary on Job is the earliest that survives in a nearly complete form. Unlike Pseudo-Origen or Pseudo-Chrysostom, it treats the entire book of Job. Julian focuses on the literal and historical meaning of the text, with some theological polemic against the Nicenes and Manichees thrown in. His commentary may have inuenced the Job sermons of Pseudo-Chrysostom, which sometimes makes it di"cult to determine whether Pseudo-Origen was borrowing directly from Julian or indirectly by way of Pseudo-Chrysostom/Severianus. As with Pseudo-Chrysostom, most of Pseudo-Origens parallels to Julian are on the historical and literal level. Pseudo-Origen and Julian use a similar argument to prove that Moses authored the book of Job. According to Pseudo-Origen, only the man who had been given knowledge of creation could have known what God said to the devil. Likewise in Julian, only Moses could have known what God had said to the devil in heaven, since Moses had been granted by God knowledge of past events such as the creation of the world.67

64 Bardy, Recherches sur Saint Lucien dAntiochem, pp. 1819, confuses the two texts. 65 D. Hagedorn, Introduction to Der Hiobkommentar des Arianers Julian, p. xxxv. 66 Ibid. pp. liiiliv for his Arianism, p. lvi for connection with Syria and Antioch, and pp. lvlvi for dating. 67 Ps. Orig. 374A: Sicut enim de factura coeli et terrae nemo alius ita diligenter poterat nosse, vel loqui, vel scribere sicut Moyses, ita nec ea quae circa Job gesta sunt; Julianus, Hiobkommentar, prologus, ed. Hagedorn, p. 2: ou dei r tv ` au tou `z ca ~ n pro ~ e teroz g jiv ` n tou smou kti hg tg sin craQg paradou ~ ko ~nai.

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 77 The two authors give very similar explanations of Jobs originsnot merely his descent from Esau and location in Arabian Idumeabut, more signicantly, his designation as well-born (de genere optimo, eu ceng ` z) in Job 1:3. In contrast to other commentators who understand eu ceng ` z to mean that Job was nobly born, both Pseudo-Origen and Julian emphasize how despicable Jobs earthly birth was. According to Pseudo-Origen, Jobs people, the Ausitae (Arabs by his time) were impious, unjust, unfaithful, lthy, insatiable, just like their father Esau (377B). According to Julian, the very phrase in the region Ausitis indicated the wretchedness of the inhabitants of Jobs native land: for they were Arabs, but the depravity of these men did not besmirch the mind of the God-loving one.68 Rather than mere prejudice against Arabs, it was the Ausitaes descent from Esau that makes Julian and Pseudo-Origen despise their birth. So why did Moses call Job eu ceng ` z? Both Julian and Pseudo-Origen argue that Job was well-born not because he was of noble descent, but because he imitated the faith of Abraham and other saints, thus entering into a relationship with them.69 Julian also may have been Pseudo-Origens source for interpreting the speeches of the various characters of his story, especially God and devil. For example, according to Pseudo-Origen and Julian, God asked the devil where are you coming from not out of ignorance, but in order to condemn the devils envy of Job. God had a similar purpose when He asked Adam where are you?70 The devils response that he had been circling all of the

Julianus, Hiobkommentar 1,1a, ed. Hagedorn, p. 5. Ps. Orig. 390AB: Sicut admirabilis ille Job, qui digne ac juste bene natus appellatur, non quia ex Esau generatione carnaliter fuerit orsus, sed quia Abraham per Deo dilectam dem est imitatus. _ Ergo quia omnium sanctorum sanctitatis particeps eectus est beatus Job, idcirco digne ex genere optimo fuisse dictus est, utpote totius justitiae nobilitatem in se gestans, utpote omnium amicorum Domini libertatem in se continens; Julianus, Hiobkommentar 1,3g, ed. Hagedorn, p. 10: tau ` tou rgke peri ~ta ei ~ Abraa ` m ce noz sgma menoz kai tg mo tropon kai `n a ca pgz ` o stevz tv ` tg z heo ~nai boulo ~z pi ~z ei ~ to ` paraplg sion, e pei kata ` tg ` n eu ` se beian suntetacme noz kai ` tg ` n eu noian per ou ` kata toz o ~ ~ g nvme noz, ou xei tg cenei toroz, ou ceng ` z tv Q g li z tou ou toz mete toz eu ~n a ~z eu ~ propa ~ menoz tv rv tv ci mati tv si a natolv vn, tv vn. toz sunarihmou ~ klg ~n a ~ politeu ~n o ~ n, ou 70 Ps. Orig. 407a: Sed non ut inscius interrogavit unde venisset, sicut nec Adam olim, ubi esset, sed occultam atque abditam cogitationem eius detegere atque publicare voluit. Latenti enim livore adversus Job inammatus est, latenti cogitatione Deum reprehendit; Julianus, Hiobkommentar 1,7a, ed. Hagedorn, p. 13: ou k a cnov hen ~n o ~ ~ g menoz parace conen, a ll e le cxvn au tou ` n kata ` tou boulo an. ken g ti ~ tg ~ dikai ~ou baskani ~ kai r pou kai pi Ada m Qgsin. Ada m, pou ` ca `e ` tou ; In contrast, Severianus thought ~ ~ ei God asked the question to give the devil a chance to admit to his sinful thoughts: Ps. Chrys. 4.1 (PG 56.577).
69

68

78 LESLIE DOSSEY earth struck both commentators as boasting.71 When God then asked the devil whether he had seen Jobthat man without quarrel, a just, true, worshipper of Godhis intent was to criticize the devil, by pointing out those traits that the corporal Job possessed and the acorporeal devil did not.72 When they come to the blasphemy of Jobs wife, both Julian and Pseudo-Origen describe the devil falling upon the wife in an almost demonic possession.73 According to them, Job rebukes her for not speaking in accordance with his (Jobs) teachings.74 We nd in Julian some of the same arguments as used by PseudoChrysostom and Pseudo-Origen to explain away passages that might imply that Job or his family members were sinners. When Job cursed the day of his birth, all three exegetes note that Job was cursing his own day, not a creation of God, and that the prophet Jeremiah behaved similarly. Only Julian makes the same philosophical point as Pseudo-Origen that by cursing a past day, Job cursed something that did not exist, something that had no substance.75 In Julian, as in Pseudo-Chrysostom and PseudoOrigen, the presence of Jobs daughters at his sons dinner table
71 Ps. Orig. 409A: magniloquio atque arrogantia uteris, o miserrime diabole; Julianus, Hiobkommentar 1,7bc, ed. Hagedorn, p. 14: tau ` a lafonikv ~z ~ta de a pokri a posta ` tgz dra ` kvn; and also Ps. Chrys. 3.2 (PG 56.573): E~ i ta o netai o u perg Qanoz kai lafv ` n. `a 72 Ps. Orig. 412A: Nonne victus est, et dejectus atque humiliatus, ut Job corruptibilis atque terrenus homo servus meus sit, et in mea servitute maneat? Tu vero, o diabole, cum superior sis angelis _ a mea servitute recessisti; 413A: Et vere cum haec ad diabolum loquitur, per haec diabolum arguit atque increpat, et veluti diceret, audi, o diabole, ad te enim est hic sermo, et tua haec increpatio atque objurgatio. Sine querela est Job, vero omnibus criminibus est refertus, cf. Julianus, Hiobkommentar 1,8, ed. Hagedorn, p. 15: ou k e pi ` au tou tv heo z, a ll e pi le cjai au to `n ` timg de ` tv ~o ~e ~ lalei ~ au a sebg ina dei ti o me `n a `k yuxg dikon, kai nhrvpoz e matoz kataskeuashei `a ` jg, o ` sv `z ~ kai ~z kai ~ a ` a sv menoz ou memptoz e Qu kai matoz ceno te a memptoz ou te di ` di kaioz, ou kaioz. toz de Ambr. in psalm. 37.21 (CSEL 64.152) makes a similar interpretation. 73 Ps. Orig. 476A: Habet etiam Iob uxorem, qua me induens subtiliter per illam eum seducam; Julianus, Hiobkommentar 2,9E, ed. Hagedorn, p. 28: e pirri tv ` yaz au ~ to cu noion. 74 Ps. Orig. 487C: Quare, inquit, non meministi meae doctrinae, o mulier? Quare oblita es mea mandata, o femina? Hoccine audisti a me ut Creator blasphemetur?; Julianus, Hiobkommentar 2,1oa c, ed. Hagedorn, p. 29: sung , o ti ou tg tou ~ken de ~z au ~ ~ cu didaskali ` r mata _ ou k e n, v nai, ou de ` tg mg ` g sti so az ta az to ~z e ~z didaskali sumbouleu ein se e moi ra sashai. John Chrysostom, Commentaire sur Job 2.14 ` hev ~ a (SC 346.190) is similar. 75 Ps. Orig. 511A Quem diem suum? Qui non fuit, quem non habuit, quem non possedit _ Dies enim non est in natura, non est in substantia, neque in propria potestate; 512D non maledicebat Deum _ sed diem maledicebat qui non erat; Julianus, Hiobkommentar 3,3, ed. Hagedorn, p. 35: ou ` a n tina te de nhrvpo katarv ` u po stasin _ a lla ` tg ` n parelhou me ran, g tiz menoz Qai te a llgn tina netai ou ~san g ~ ou k g n.

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 79 testies to the chastity of their feasting.76 Although Julian does not have as many striking verbal similarities or matching Bible verses as Pseudo-Chrysostom, his similarities with Pseudo-Origen are su"ciently strong to suggest either a direct or indirect link. The third Greek exegete that Pseudo-Origen may have used is that most inuential of the Antiochenes, John Chrysostom, although here Pseudo-Origen most strongly gives the impression of sharing a common exegetical tradition rather than of drawing on Chrysostom directly. In Chrysostom, we nd one of the few instances where Pseudo-Origen resembles another author in his moral, not just literal exegesis. When explaining why Job 1:3 listed Jobs wealth entirely in terms of animals, Pseudo-Origen interprets the absence of gold and silver as evidence of the moral superiority of former times: our predecessors did not store up treasure for themselves in gold and silver as much as in cattle and quadrupeds.77 They sought a return (usuria) from animals and land, a sort of wealth that was pure, clean, unpolluted, uncontaminated (386B). When commenting on this verse, Chrysostom makes a similar point: Notice that he had agricultural wealth. He didnt say loans and interest, or minted gold. Nothing excessive, but everything absolutely necessary. Such was the wealth of the ancients.78 There are certainly some di^erences here Pseudo-Origen emphasized the purity of Jobs property, Chrysostom the utilitybut both are working in the same interpretive tradition. There is, however, reason to believe that Pseudo-Origen was relying on common sources, rather than reading Chrysostom directly. Some of his closest similarities to Chrysostom occur in passages where Chrysostom was himself drawing on previous exegesis, as indicated by the phrase some say. When discussing the speech of Jobs wife, Chrysostom notes that some say that these words were not those of Jobs wife, but rather that the devil spoke these things, having fashioned himself into her.79 This
76 Ps. Orig. 392D393A; Ps. Chrys. in Iob 2.1 (PG 56.568): see n. 55. Julianus, Hiobkommentar 1,4, ed. Hagedorn, p. 10: ma rturaz tg autv ngz e n tg ~ n svQrosu ~z e Qilotgsi a. Here Pseudo-Origen comes closer to Pseudo-Chrysostomonly Pseudo-Chrysostom and Pseudo-Origen tell us at what hour the children were dining (noon), and assure us that there was no illicit joking at the table. 77 Ps. Orig. 385D386A: Erat namque hoc vere, ut priores non tantum in auro et argento sibi thesaurizarent quantum in pecoribus et in quadrupedibus. 78 Chrys. Commentaire sur Job 1:3 (SC 346.90): Ora au tv `n ` n plou xonta to ~ton e ~ a croikikv danei kouz ei xrusi non. Ou de `n teron. Ou smata kai ` to on katorvrucme pen, ou ~ peritto n, a lla ` pa nta a nackai plou n tv ~ n palaiv ~n o ~a. Toiou ~toz g ~toz. 79 Chrys. Commentaire sur Job 2:9 (SC 346.174): Tine `z de Qasin ou de ` tg `z ~z cunaiko ~ ei ` r mata, a ll au to n, ei tg ` n tupvhe nta, tauti cceshai. g z au ` Qhe nai ta

80 LESLIE DOSSEY comes close to Julians and Pseudo-Origens interpretation (see n. 73). Where Job was said to o^er a sacrice for his children (Job 1:5), Chrysostom notes that some say that Job, as well as Melchisedek, Abraham, Noe, and Abel were priests before the Lawpriests who were sent rather than elected. But when they sacriced, they did not do so according to the Law.80 Pseudo-Origen similarly explains that Job was acting like a priest, even though there were not yet priests ordained by the Law. Job and other Old Testaments gures such as Noe, Abraham, and Melchisedek performed the o"ce of priest as natural wisdom required it.81 There are many similarities herethe two exegetes compare the same Old Testament examples, note that Job is acting like a priest before the Law, and suggest that there may have existed some type of natural priesthood. But the phrase some say in Chrysostom implies that Chrysostom was getting these interpretations elsewhere. Indeed, Jerome refers to a tradition of Antiochene exegesis according to which Old Testament gures like Melchisedek, Aaron, Abel, Enoch, Noe, and Job acted as priests before the Law.82 A third example is the two authors comments on the phrase great works (opera magna) in Job 1:3 (his works were great upon the earth). Pseudo-Origen says that these works should rst be understood to be his elds, vineyards, fruit groves, and olive groves.83 According to Chrysostom, some say the works are spiritual, for truly great works are such; others (say) that they are vines, olive trees, and other such things.84 PseudoChrysostom alludes to the same interpretation: A certain other

80 Chrys. Commentaire sur Job 1:7 (SC 346.100): Tine z Qasin o ti kai ierei ` ` ~z to ~ ~ palaio `n g sper o Melxisede k, a keiroto ngtoi. Tou sti to ` a pe stellen. E i de ` san, v n e ~to ou bel. prosQe rei husi xi ` No mon, e pei Abraa ` m prosg necken, kai , kai az, ou ` kata ` kai ` ` Nve `A 81 Ps. Orig. 395C: Erant nihilominus etiam ea tempestate sacerdotes necdum adhuc a lege ordinati, sed naturali sapientia hoc requirente ac perciente. Ita sacerdotio functus est Noe. Ita sacerdotio functus est Abraham. Ita sacerdotium gessit Melchisedech. Ita et ipse Job post illos sacerdotio functus est. 82 Hier. epist. 73.2 (CSEL 56.1415), with special reference to Apollinaris of Laodicea (his teacher at Antioch) and Eustathius of Antioch. See P. Courcelle, Late Latin writers and their Greek sources, trans. H. Wedeck (Cambridge, MA, 1969), p. 98, n. 52, and p. 119, n. 237, for a discussion of what Greek texts he was actually drawing on. 83 Ps. Orig. 387D: Primum sane opera magna fuerunt illi, id est, agri et vineae, fruteta et oliveta. He replaces the vineyards with g trees when he turns to the moral exegesis of this verse: see n. 20. 84 Chrys. Commentaire sur Job 1:3 (SC 346.90): O i me `n ta ` pneumatika Qasin. o ntvz ca ` r meca la e de , ta `z a mpe louz, ta `z e lai rca tau lla toiau az kai `a ~ta. oi ~ta.

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 81 wise man, taking the phrase in a common sense, thinks that the great works are vineyards and olive groves and acres of grain, and many such things.85 So Pseudo-Origen has given rst place to the common interpretation of a certain wise man, an interpretation that Chrysostom and Pseudo-Chrysostom also knew of (though did not necessarily agree with). There is little chance that we shall ever know the names of this wise man or the other wise men these exegetes were drawing on. Yet it is such instances of shared interpretation that show that Pseudo-Origen, Pseudo-Chrysostom, Julian, and Chrysostom were all working in a common Antiochene exegetical tradition. Pseudo-Origen has much less in common with the Alexandrians. Parallels between him and Didymus of Alexandria are almost non-existent, partly because of their very di^erent exegetical methods.86 Similarities between Pseudo-Origen and the sixthcentury Olympiodorus are infrequent.87 The only Alexandrian I consider a possible source for Pseudo-Origen is the real Origen, whose commentary on Job, though lost to us, survived (at least in its Latin form) up to the late sixth century.88 Pseudo-Origens interpretation of Job 1:10a resembles a fragment of Origens Job commentary surviving in the Byzantine catenae.89 The very rst
85 lloz tiz soQo Ps. Chrys. in Iob 3.1 (PG 56.571): A ` z koinv klamba nvn to ` n lo con, ~z e ~ nomi la ei mpelv laiv rima ple hra, kai sa toiau rca meca fei e `e ` spo `o nai a ~ naz kai ~ naz kai ~ta. 86 I have found only two similarities between Ps. Orig. and Didymus (or perhaps, more accurately, one and a half ). In Jb 2:10, Job realized that the devil was speaking through his wife: Didymus, Kommentar zu Hiob 49.68, ed. Henrichs, p. 152; Ps. Orig. 486C. In Jb 1:16, when re is reported to have fallen from the sky, Job realizes that his misfortunes are from God, not man (he had not attributed the rst disasterraiders taking his animalsto God): Didymus, Kommentar zu Hiob 28.413, ed. Henrichs, 98; Ps. Orig. 422D. However, according to Didymus, the re really did come from God (28.2023), while, according to Pseudo-Origen, the devil sent it, wanting Job to think it was from God (Pseudo-Origen, unlike Didymus, was willing to give the devil the power of generation). 87 Omitting those cases where both appear to be drawing on Chrysostom, I have found two parallels. God spoke to the devil through angels, not directly: Olympiodorus, Kommentar zu Hiob, 16.12^; cf. Ps. Orig. 405D. God forbade the devil from touching Jobs body to preserve him for a future contest: Olymp., Kommentar zu Hiob, 19.1018; cf. Ps. Orig. 418C. 88 Fragments of Origens commentary on Job survive in the Byzantine catenae: lteren griechischen Katenen, pp. 107108. There was see U. and D. Hagedorn, Die A also a Latin translation by Hilary of Poitiers: the few surviving fragments are in Hil. fr. min., ed. A. Feder (CSEL 65.22931). The Latin translation was known to Augustine and to the late sixth-century Licinianus of Cartagena. 89 In the verse, the devil says that Job did not worship God without reason because You have fortied those things of his which are outside his house and within his house. Origens interpretation was that the devil had very often wanted

82 LESLIE DOSSEY line of Pseudo-Origens commentary, where he compares the lights of rmament of the heavens (the stars, moon, sun) to the saints, echoes the metaphors in several of Origens homilies on Genesis.90 Pseudo-Origens (and Julians) explanation of why Job was called well-born smacks of Origen, as does PseudoOrigens explanation for why Job cursed the day when he was born.91 Yet, in essentials, Pseudo-Origen was no Origenian.92 If he used Origens commentarywhether in its Greek or Latin
to do the things to Job that he would later do (i.e. destroy Jobs property), but knew that everything had been protected by God: Cat. 2.53 (Origen), ed. Hagedorn, lteren griechischen Katenen, pp. 2089: g ~ ~ pi ` n Iv kiz Die A ` b polla ` e ` to n kai lhen ou ~ jousi ti pa nta u boulo menoz tau `n e an pepoi gken, kai ` o steron labv ~ ~ta poig ~sai, a ~ saz e k tou menoz poiei ` peri peripeQracme na g ` tau ` nkai ~ta nog ~ kekvlu ~shaiboulo ~n ta ~ tou ` b ei pe _ . Pseudo-Origen says that the devil had very often wanted to ~ lv destroy Jobs possessions, but had not been permitted to by Gods omnipotent hand: Ps. Orig. 414D, Quoties, inquit, volui appropinquare, et non inveni accessum, cum protegis atque obumbas? Quoties, inquit volui perdere et exterminare, et non permisit omnipotens manus tua. This is the only fragment of Origen in the catenae that deals with the same verse as Pseudo-Origen. 90 Ps. Orig. 371A: Sicut coeli luminaria ac sidera in rmamento caeli _ fulgent _, sic et sanctorum virtutis insignia _ fulgent; cf. Run. Orig. in gen. 1.7 (SC 7.40), for luminaria _ in rmamento caeli being compared to Christ, the Church, and Old Testament saints, and ibid. 9.2 (SC 7.246) for a comparison of stars to the iusti et prophetae. Both Origen and Pseudo-Origen base this comparison on 1 Cor. 15:41 (stella ab stella diert in gloria, ita etiam sanctorum resurrectio): Ps. Orig. 371A; Run. Orig. in gen. 1.7 (SC 7.40) and 9.2 (SC 7.246). 91 According to Pseudo-Origen, Job is called well-born not because he was of noble earthly descent, but because he imitated the faith of Abraham and other saints: see n. 69. In his homilies on Ezechiel, Origen notes that not all those descended from Abraham are sons of Abraham. If you imitate the deeds of Abraham, the patience of Job, and so forth, you can be the sons of these holy men: Hier. hom. Orig. in Ezech. 4.4 (SC 352.172 and 174). He uses one of the same examples as Pseudo-OrigenCham the bad son of Noeto demonstrate the insignicance of blood descent: ibid. 4.4 (SC 352.172); cf. Ps. Orig. 389C. According to Pseudo-Origen, Job cursed the day of his birth (Jb 3:3) because saints do not celebrate their day of birth but rather their day of death: Nunc vero nos non nativitatis diem celebramus, cum sit dolorum atque tentationum introitus, sed mortis diem celebramus. In his homilies on Leviticus, Origen notes that the saints do not celebrate birthdaysonly evil men like Pharaoh and Herod doand that Job was an example of this: Run. Orig. in Lev. 8.3 (SC 287.16) and 8.3 (SC 287.18). Ambrose (who may have been using Origen) comes even closer to Pseudo-Origen: see n. 96. 92 Among other things, he di^ered from Origen in his cosmology. One of the few things we know about Origens Job commentary (or at least its Latin translation) is that it portrayed the stars as having rational souls: see J. Doignon, Rengaines orige niennes dans les Home lies sur Job dHilaire de Poitiers, in `res, pp. 711, drawing on a letter of Licinianus of Cartagena Livre de Job chez les Pe who had read the commentary: Greg. M. epist. 1.41a (MGH Epistolae 1, 5861). Pseudo-Origen, even if attracted to Origens metaphors comparing saints to the stars, considered the stars inanimate (386B, 401A).

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 83 formhe did so on a supercial level, and must have been drawing on the Antiochenes independently. So what do we conclude from this comparison of PseudoOrigen to the Greek exegesis on Job? His parallels with Pseudo-Chrysostom/Severianus are su"ciently close that he was likely drawing on him directly. As for the others, he may have been sharing their sources, relying on lost commentaries that shared their sources, or using an early form of the catenae. The important point is that Pseudo-Origen was heavily dependent on Greek exegesis. His exegetical roots seem to lie in the area of Constantinople. This is where we nd the text that comes closest to Pseudo-Origen in genre (the sixth-century Job sermons of Leontius) and where the Job homilies of John Chrysostom and Severianus of Gabala were probably written. Moreover, Constantinople was one of the few areas of the Eastern Roman Empire where a Greek Arian community survived into the sixth century.93 What is to say that Pseudo-Origen wasnt a Greek Arian, writing in fth-century Constantinople, and later translated into Latin? The main evidence that Pseudo-Origen originally wrote in Latin rather than Greek lies in his Bible, not his exegesis. Nevertheless, before turning to his Scriptures, it will useful to compare him to other Latin treatments of Job, not so much to explain his specic interpretations as to illuminate more general patterns of his description and theology. Although there is little to link Pseudo-Origen to the other Latin commentaries on Job, he has more in common with Latin authors who either predated or otherwise escaped the inuence of Jerome. Ambrose, Ambrosiaster, and Quodvultdeus of Carthage at least give Job the same ancestrymaking him an Idumaean, descended from Esau, living before the Law.94 In Ambrose and Ambrosiaster (as in Pseudo-Origen and Julian), Jobs descent shows that good

93 The last known Greek Arian bishop of Constantinople was Deuterios (AD c.500): Theodoros Anagnostos, Epitome 475, ed. G. C. Hansen (Berlin: 1971), p. 136; discussed by R. Mathisen, Barbarian Bishops and the Churches in barbaricis gentibus during Late Antiquity, Speculum 72 (1997), pp. 664 95, p. 676. Justinian undertook the nal suppression of the Arians of Constantinople (with an exemption for Gothic federates): see Moorhead, Theoderic in Italy, p. 237. 94 Ambrosiast. quaest. test. 118.3 (CSEL 50.355) for Job living before the Law and Ambrosiast. Comment. in Epist. Paul. 9.10 (CSEL 81.1.312) for descent from Esau; Ambr. in psalm. 36.63 (CSEL 64.121); Quodv. prom. 1.22.30 (CC 60.38) for descent from Esau in Idumaea. Jerome, following Hebrew sources, made Job a descendant of Nachor through Hus: Hier. quaest. hebr. in gen. 22.2022 (CC 72.27).

84 LESLIE DOSSEY and faithful men can be born from bad seed.95 Ambrose makes several other interpretations that come close to Pseudo-Origens. According to Ambrose, Job cursed the day he was born (Job 3:3) because he knew that being born was the beginning of all evils and longed for the day of resurrection.96 This is similar to Pseudo-Origens comment on the same verse that the day of our earthly birth is the dolorum atque tentationum introitus and that we should instead celebrate the day of our death.97 Ambrose observes that God praised Job to the devil, because praise of man of an inferior substance is a condemnation of one who has fallen from a superior position. According to Pseudo-Origen (and Julian), God rebuked the devil by pointing out those traits that the earthly Job possessed and the angelic devil did not.98 In these examples, Ambroses language is not close enough to Pseudo-Origens to make him a likely direct source, but the two authors may have been drawing on the same Greek exegetical tradition, possibly Origen. Pseudo-Origen resembles Latin textsespecially sermonsin his treatment of Jobs plague. According to the Septuagint (Job 2:78), the devil had struck Job with a wound ( plaga in PseudoOrigen) from his head to his feet. Pseudo-Origen greatly elaborated on this description. The plague a^ected every part of Jobs body. He su^ered putrefaction, maggots, division of bones, disintegration of tendons (468A). He could not sit or lie down. He couldnt lift food or drink with his hands, nor would it have helped if he could have, since his mouth was too putrid to receive it (469B). Flowing body uids dissolved his esh, while innumerable maggots devoured his nerves and bones (475B, 517D). The Latin sermons narrate Jobs plague in much the same way. According to a Pseudo-Augustinian sermon, no body part of Job was una^ected by the devils wounds. His tendons dissolved. His owing esh putreed, and maggots didnt allow him rest during
95 Ambr. in psalm. 36.63 (CSEL 64.121); Ambrosiast. Comment. in Epist. Paul. 9.10 (CSEL 81.1.312). 96 Ambr. exc. Sat. 2.32 (CSEL 73.266): et cognoverat nasci malorum omnium esse principium et ideo diem, qua natus est, perire optavit, ut tolleretur origio incommodorum et optavit perire diem generationis suae, ut diem resurrectionis acciperet. 97 Ps. Orig. 517A (see n. 91). 98 Ambr. in psalm 37.21 (CSEL 64.152): Iob seruulum suum dominus conversus ad diabolum praedicaret, ut ureretur inuidus et humani generis aduersariuslaus enim inferioris substantiae uiri condemnatio eius est, qui de statu superiore deiectus est. See n. 72 for Ps. Orig. and Julian.

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 85 the night or day.99 In the homiliary of Pseudo-Fulgentius (a Catholic of Vandal North Africa), all of Jobs members were seized by the plaga. The bones were deserted by the esh, gore owed from him, and horric little beasts erupted from his wounds.100 According to Quodvultdeus of Carthage, Jobs whole body putreed, all his joints loosened, gore owed out, and maggots boiled up.101 Maggots and owing gore also show up in the Greek sermons on Job, but the special interest in tendons, joints, and bones seems distinctive to the Latin texts.102 Rather than any direct textual borrowing, I think PseudoOrigens description of Jobs plague was inuenced by variants in the Old Latin Bible and, possibly, by visual representations of Job.103 Another characteristic of Pseudo-Origens exegesis that, in my opinion, links him to the West is his attitude towards evil. Throughout the text, Pseudo-Origen is reluctant to admit that good and evil can mix, whether in heaven, in the Church, or in the individual. One of the strongest di^erences between him and his
99 Ps. Aug. serm. 50 (PL 39.1841): Vermibus corpus inquietis doloris tolerabat geminata supplicia, quam uxae carnis putredinem praedurabat fecunda calamitas: non noctibus quies, non diebus requies. _ Dissolutis nervis, saniei prouvium asperior testa radebat, atrox cruciatus mutabat. 100 Ps. Fulg. Rusp. serm. 71 (PL 65.944B): Nihil fuit membrorum, quod non captivaverat plaga aspergine vulnerum. Ita plagaverat membra, ut ossa remanerent carnibus desolata _ Deinde sanies manabat, ex ulcerum sinibus horribiles bestiae erumpebant. 101 Quodv. prom. 1.22.30 (CC 60.39): quem percussum graui uulnere, putrefacta totius corporis conpage, omnibusque artubus solutis, sania prouente, ebullientibus uermibus. 102 Chrys. Commentaire sur Job 2.3 (SC 346.172) observes that Job was food for worms and foul in smell. In Ps. Chrys. In Iob 4.2 (PG 56.578), Jobs body ows and brings forth maggots. Pseudo-Eusebius Alexandrinus, Sermo 4 (PG 86.333B)certainly the most graphic of the Greek descriptionsenvisions maggots and owing gore; no doctor could cure him. The Testament of Job (a Greek apocryphal book possibly translated from Aramaic or Hebrew) is the probable source for these Greek (as well as some of the Latin) descriptions of Jobs disease. In the Testament, Job sits in dung, his body is infested with worms, and his body uids (mixed together with worms) ow out onto the ground: Testament of Job 20.810, ed. K. Kraft, The Testament of Job (Texts and Translations 5. Pseudepigrapha s. 4) (Missoula, 1974), p. 42. However, neither the Testament nor the other Greek texts discuss what happened to Jobs tendons, bones, and joints. 103 For the scriptural variants, see p. 91. According to S. Terrien, The Iconography of Job through the Centuries: Artists as Biblical Interpreters (University Park, Pa, 1996), images of Jobs plague rst became popular in Late Antiquity and show the inuence of the Testament of Job. None of Terriens late antique examples show as debilitating a plague as described by Pseudo-Origen and the sermons, but he includes very few images from the provinces and none from North Africa.

86 LESLIE DOSSEY Greek sources is his refusal to believe that the devil spoke directly to God in Job 1:67. God would not have had an audience with the devil, because no just prince would include murderers, thieves, or other criminals among his counsellors.104 In PseudoOrigens eyes, men were not only capable of avoiding evil company, but also of avoiding evil itself. They could be perfect if they triedthe Israelites in Moses speech were holy, righteous, and perfect men (375B). Job was without reproach, that is unviolated by any spot, that is having no share in any blame (379A). Jobs spotlessness was a sign of how future bishops should be: he was without reproach, that is, showing in himself the form of the new grace, where a bishop ought to be irreprehensible.105 Not only Job, but all humans are born in natural freedom from sin.106 The power to maintain this freedom lay in the will of men; if they wanted to avoid evil and perform good works, they were able to do so.107 Blessed were those who kept themselves free from sins either for their entire lives, oras was more likelyafter sincere repentance.108 Such pure Christians made up the church of the saints, the congregation of the religious,
104 Ps. Orig. 406A: nam si hic super terram nemo de veris ac justis principibus atque judicibus, homicidas, aut fures aut etiam facinorosos latrones confabulari secum, vel consiliari facit, ne similis illis judicetur; cf. 450B. The devil, like a thief in prison turning his mind to the mountains outside, approaches God only in his envious thoughts (401D, 404D, 405D). In contrast, Pseudo-Chrysostom interprets the standing before (parastasis) of the devil as a type of administrative service (u pourci a) to the Lord, comparing the devil and his demons to imperial soldiers: Ps. Chrys. In Iob 3.1 (PG 56.571). Chrysostom tells his audience not to be surprised that the devil was present among the angels, for just as evil and good men are mixed up together, so are angels and demons: Chrys. Commentaire sur Job 1.9 (SC 346.108). Even Julian admits that God spoke to the devil, noting that being in honourable company does not make someone honourable: Julianus, Hiobkommentar 1,6, ed. Hagedorn, 12. 105 Ps. Orig. 379A: erat sine querela, utpote formam in se ostendens novae gratiae, ubi episcopum irreprehensibilem esse oportet. Cf. Ps. Chrys. In Iob 2.2 (PG 56.569) on the same verse. The Arian Latin Commentary on Luke also interprets the words sine quaerella (though not in connection to Job) in the context of bishops being irreprehensible: Tract. in Luc. 1.6 (CC 87.201). 106 Ps. Orig. 390A: hic sane veraciter generosus nuncupatur, quia libertatem illam quae ab initio naturaliter est concessa, peccato non vitiavit, neque delicto maculavit. _ Nam quis vere bene erit natus, nisi is qui divinam nativitatem atque conditionem integram conservaverit? 107 Ps. Orig. 464B: In arbitrio ergo hominum est potestas, sanctitas atque constantia. In arbitrio est hominum potestas dei ac pietatis. Si enim voluerint declinare a malis, et facere bona, et valent, et possunt, et non praevalet illis nequissimus; discussed by Meslin, Ariens, pp. 21415. 108 Ps. Orig. 514C: Verumtamen beati ii qui in die nativitatis, hoc est, in principio vitae suae benedictuntur, hoc est ea quae digna sunt benedictione perciunt. Beati

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 87 the gathering of the immaculate and the uncontaminated and the chaste.109 Such sentiments would have been quite repugnant to the Western orthodox tradition, especially Augustine of Hippo, who considered the Church a necessary mixture of the just and the unjust, and Job himself a sinner.110 However, Pseudo-Origen would have found company among a long line of Western heretics who considered the Church immaculate, and had never accepted an Augustinian stance on grace, including the Donatist rigorists of the fourth and fth centuries and, especially, the Pelagians of the fth. For the Donatists, the Church was indeed perfect and spotless.111 Christians (especially clerics) had the ability to avoid sin in their own lives, and the duty to shun the company of heretics and sinners.112 The Pelagians took these attitudes further, applying the words immaculate and perfect to all true Christians. According to Pelagian texts, it was possible for Christians to avoid sin through their own free will.113 Children did not inherit Adams sin or the punishment for his sin. Sinless men existed before the coming of Christ.114 Job was a popular example among Pelagians and semi-Pelagiansa man without sin by Gods own testimony, who defeated the devil by his own strength quoque et ii qui in tempore nativitatis suae, hoc est in principio aetatis atque ignorantia juventutis suae, licet maledicantur pro peccatis atque ignorantia juventutis, in diem mortis atque in nem aetatis suae rursus benedicentur, et benedictionem promerebuntur per sinceram poenitudinem. 109 Ps. Orig. 393A: Ob hoc ergo convocabant secum tres sorores suas, ut erent omnes simul ecclesia sanctorum, congregatio religiosorum, conventus immaculatorum, et incoinquinatorum atque castorum. 110 For Job as sinner, see Aug. pecc. mer. 2.12.17 (CSEL 60.89); Aug. perf. iust. 11.29 (CSEL 42.29); and Oros. apol. 21.4 (CSEL 5.637). 111 Pseudo-Cyprian, De centesima, sexagesima, tricesima (PLS 1.55): domus adunata atque perfecta, quod est ecclesia; Petilianus apud Conc. Carth. a. 411 3.75 (SC 224.1038): Omnis ecclesia Dei pura, sancta, sine macula et ruga esse debebit. 112 The Donatist author of the Escurial sermons orders his audience to avoid contact with heretics and sinners and gives Christians no excuse for sinning, since they have full ability to avoid it, just as Adam did: Collectio Escurialensis Sermo 5, De Genesi (PLS 4.67173). He is, however, no Pelagian; the good that men do should be attributed to God, not men. 113 Caelestius apud Aug. perf. iust. 3.56.13 (CSEL 42.612); Tract. Pelag. 5 (De possibilitate non peccandi) (PLS 1.14571464); Aug. gest. Pelag. 6.16 (CSEL 42.69). In the last example, Pelagius is forced to admit that the grace of God is also necessary. 114 Aug. gest. Pelag. 11.2324 (CSEL 42.7677). The denial of original sin and the belief that Adam was created mortal were teachings of Caelestius rather than Pelagius: see G. Bonner, Augustine and Modern Research on Pelagianism (Villanova, 1972), p. 25.

88 LESLIE DOSSEY of will, not by the mere grace of God.115 It is true that PseudoOrigen has a more worldly denition of perfection than the early Pelagian thinkers: in contrast to their emphasis on asceticism, he praised Jobs pure material wealth, and regarded marriage as a divinely ordained, even immaculate institution.116 Still, Augustine would have condemned Pseudo-Origen as a Pelagian as well as an Arian. This relates to the question of whether Pseudo-Origen was a Greek or Latin author insofar as Pelagianism was a controversy that a^ected the Latin more than the Greek world. Admittedly, Greek thinkersespecially the Antiochenesheld attitudes towards original sin and free will that were labelled Pelagian by Western theologians.117 Yet they were neither as extreme as Pseudo-Origen, nor so conscious of the controversial nature of their views.118 Pseudo-Origen is ever aware of his opponents.
115 Caelestius apud Aug. perf. iust. 11.2324, 12.29, and 16.37 (CSEL 42.2324, 29, and 38); Prosper (summarizing Cassians semi-Pelagian argument about Job), De gratia dei 15.1 (PL 51.256A). 116 See Ps. Orig. 382B where he considers marriage part of the arrangement of divine providence and calls it licit and immaculate; 383C where Job is said to have been chastely married in accordance both with both natura and the promise of the Creator (sancte et pudice secundum ocium naturae, caste ac veraciter iuxta Creatoris promissionem), and 429B where Job hoped to crown his daughters with the glorious crowns of marriage. Pseudo-Origens notion of a chaste marriage seems to mean no extramarital a^airs; it does not preclude the production of children. There is no hint that he considers marriage inferior to virginity, or that it was more tting for those in Old Testament times than in the present. For the emphasis on virginity, chastity, and the renunciation of property in early Pelagian treatises, see J. Morris, Pelagian literature, JTS, NS, 16 (1965), pp. 2660, at p. 40, and M. R. Rackett, Anxious for worldly things: The critique of marriage in the anonymous Pelagian treatise De Castitate, Studia Patristica 33 (1997), pp. 22935. The Pelagians of the fth century, especially Julian of Eclanum, had a more positive attitude towards marriage: see D. G. Hunter, Introduction to Marriage in the Early Church (Minneapolis, 1992), p. 24 for a discussion of Augustines Ep. 6* on the Pelagian view of marriage and E. A. Clark, Adams only companion: Augustine and the early Christian debate on marriage, Recherches Augustiniennes 21 (1986), pp. 13962 for Julian of Eclanums arguments. 117 Theodore of Mopsuestia was accused of Pelagianism for emphasizing free will, denying that mankind inherited guilt from Adam, and being attracted to the idea that Adam was created mortal: see J. M. Dewart, The Theology of Grace of Theodore of Mopsuestia (Washington, D.C., 1971), pp. 3740 and pp. 6973, who also points out some key di^erences between Pelagianism and Theodores theology. 118 For the relative indi^erence of the Greek world towards the Pelagian controversy, see R. A. Markus, The legacy of Pelagius: orthodoxy, heresy and conciliation, in The Making of Orthodoxy, ed. R. Williams (Cambridge, 1989), pp. 21434, at p. 216; and L. Wickham, Pelagianism in the East, ibid. pp. 20013, at p. 210.

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 89 When Job curses the day he was born (Job 3:3), Pseudo-Origen launches into a diatribe against certain heretical, unwise, and unlearned men, who hearing these things, have dared to accuse and reprehend that just man Job, as if he had blasphemed God (510AB). Some anti-Pelagians had viewed the verse as proof of Jobs sinfulness. When God gives Jobs body over to the devil, with the warning not to touch his anima (Job 2:6), PseudoOrigen begins a lengthy explanation on how men can resist sin and the devil through their own human will (4634). The relevance of his discussion to the verse is a little obscure until we realize that the anti-Pelagians had used Job 2:6 as evidence that Gods grace was protecting Jobs soul.119 These are not stray examples: much of the commentary can be read as an assertion of the ability of humans to avoid sin and sinful company. And this awareness of the Pelagian controversy is perhaps more indicative of a Latin than Greek origin. So my comparison of Pseudo-Origen to other exegetes has achieved a rather mixed result. On the one hand, PseudoOrigen seems to be mining Greek exegesis from the area of Constantinople and Syria, most clearly the Job sermons of Pseudo-Chrysostom/Severianus of Gabala, and (possibly) Julian the Arian and John Chrysostom. He was not slavish in his borrowing. Even when compared to Pseudo-Chrysostom, he rarely comes close to translation, and connes his derivations to literal (or, occasionally, gurative) exegesis rather than his moral advice to his congregation. He was particularly careful to avoid anything that suggested the Job was a sinner, that he associated with sinners, or that God associated with the devil. This sensitivity towards matters of sin and pure company, in addition to his description of Jobs plague, may connect him to the Latins more than Greeks. However, the question as to a Greek or Latin origin cannot be answered by examining the exegesis alone.

II.

P S E U D O -O R I G E N S B I B L E

The strongest indication that Pseudo-Origen originally wrote in Latin is found not in his exegesis, but in his Bible. Pseudo-Origen used an Old Latin translation of Job with a"nities with the recension found in North African texts from the third to sixth centuries AD. Now this by itself would not mean very much. Translators sometimes inserted their version of the Bible rather than translating the Scriptures anew. But the pattern one would expect to nd
119

Oros. apol. 20.6 (CSEL 5.636).

90 LESLIE DOSSEY in a translation is the Old Latin Bible when the Scriptures were quoted, but exegesis based largely on the Greek Septuagint. The pattern in Pseudo-Origen is the opposite. When he quotes scriptures directly, he gives an exact translation of the Septuagint, but in his discussion, he demonstrates a familiarity with variants that only appear in the Old Latin. We see this familiarity with distinctively Old Latin variants in his comments on Job 1:21. For the rst half of his discussion, Pseudo-Origen quotes the verse according to the Old Latin: naked I departed from the womb of my mother, naked also I will go under the earth.120 The under the earth (sub terram) phrase does not appear in the Septuagint, which merely has cumno ` z kai ` 121 Pseudo-Origen not only includes the phrase a peleu somai e xei ~. when he quotes Scripture, but also incorporates it into his discussion, noting that stripped of all envy, pride, lust, and anything else contrary to God, Job will go under the earth (440C), that those who are weighted down by cruelty, injustice, and impiety will not go naked into the earth (440D), and that anything buried in the earth with the body will also be turned into earth.122 In the second half of his discussion, he provides a more literal translation from the Greek (nudus ibo illuc), but then immediately defends the meaning of the Old Latin reading:
Abandoning anything superuous, (Job said) naked I will go there. There he said, where is there? First surely I will go there where all my ancestors went, where all went from the beginning, there into the earth, the mother of all.123

So although Pseudo-Origen was aware that the Septuagint did not include the superuous sub terram, he nevertheless proved that the stripped-down version meant the same thing. This strongly suggests that the commentary was originally written in Latin, not Greek. A Greek author would have had no motive to comment on, much less justify, a phrase that did not exist in any Greek Bible.

120 Ps. Orig. 440B, 441A, 441B: nudus exivi de utero matris meae, nudus et ibo sub terram (alt. illuc 441B). 121 Job 1:21b, ed. Ziegler, Septuaginta Iob, p. 214; cf. vadam illuc in Jeromes Liber Iob (PL 29.67). Ziegler lists no variants in the apparatus equivalent to sub terram. 122 Ps. Orig. 440B: Quod enim pariter cum corpore positum fuerit in terra, cum eodem corpore terrae ecitur terra. Merito nudus ibo sub terram. 123 Ibid. 441B: superua omnia derelinquens nudus ibo illuc. Illuc, inquit, quo illuc? Primum quidem illuc ibo quo omnes priores mei ierunt, quo omnes ab initio, illuc in terram matrem omnium.

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 91 A second, more grotesque example occurs in his discussion of Jobs plague (Job 2:7b8a). According to the Septuagint, the devil struck Job with a severe wound from his feet to his head, and he took a potsherd so that he might scrape the gore.124 The Old Latin appears to have replaced Jobs interaction with the potsherd (2:8a) with something along the lines of: he struck him with a grave wound from his head to his feet; he putreed, owed with gore, and teemed with maggots.125 These phrases do not appear in Job 2:8a of the Septuagint, though the Testament of Job has a"nities with the Old Latin.126 Jerome in his translation of the Septuagint duly left the phrase out, bragging in the prologue that his readers may rejoice that the blessed Job who had been teeming with maggots among the Latins was now made whole again.127 Pseudo-Origen likewise omitted the phrase when he translated Job 2:8a directly.128 However, he alludes to it in his discussiondescribing how Job down to the bottom of his feet dripped with one wound, he was held in a single putrefaction, he teemed with these same maggots, and how the devil had
124 Ziegler, Septuaginta Iob, p. 217: kai ` n lv lkei pongrv po ` podv paisen to `b e `e ~a ~n e vz keQalg ina to `n ixv g. laben o strakon, `e ~ ra ju ~z. kai 125 In the absence of any critical edition of the Old Latin Job, it is di"cult to reconstruct this verse. What I have given is a composite of Augustines quotations: Aug. symb. 3.10 (CC 46.193) percussus est uulnere a capite usque ad pedes, sanie deuebat, uermibus scatebat; in psalm. 97.6 (CC 39.1374) percussa est, coepit putrescere, scatere uermibus; in psalm. 103.4.7 (CC 40.1527) percussit graui uulnere a capite usque ad pedes; contabescebat putredine, scatebat uermibus; serm. 22A.3 (CC 41.304) percussit eum itaque graui uulnere a capite usque ad pedes, et putrescens uermibus; in psalm. 90.1.2 (CC 39.1256) cum a capite usque ad pedes in putredine uermium ueret; and urb. 3.3 (CC 46.253) percussus graui uulnere a capite usque ad pedes sedebat in stercore, putrescens ulcere, sanie auens, uermibus scatens. Cf. Caes. Arel. serm. app. 132.1 (CC 103.543) percussus est, coepit putrescere, ita ut eum scatentes globi uermium exararent; Zeno 1.15.6 (CC 22.61) in sterquilinio foetido scaturiente uermibus; Quodv. prom. 1.22.30 (CC 60.39) quem percussum graui uulnere, putrefacta totius corporis conpage, omnibusque artubus solutis, sania prouente, ebullientibus uermibus; and Fulg. Rusp. inc. 55 (CC 91.355) etiam seruum suum Iob sanie ac uermibus ebullire permisit. At least in Augustine, the phrase replaces 2:8a; he doesnt mention the potsherd except in the Adnotationum in Iob, where the translation of Job is wholly Jeromes. 126 Testament of Job 20.7: kai pa taje n me plgcg ` n sklgra `n a pv vz o nu xvn ` koruQg `e ~z e ~ tv pi brvton ei ` sv z `4 kaheshei `z e ` tg az skvlgko xon to ~ n podv ~ n mou _ 5kai ~ mato ~z kopri mou. kai brexon tg ` n cg k tg crasi ixv z mou. There is no mato ` sune az kai ` ~ rez tou ~n e ~z u ~ sv mention of the potsherd. It is possible that the Old Latin and the Testament of Job preserve an early reading of the Septuagint. 127 Hier. interpr. Iob praef., ed. R. Weber and R. Gryson, Biblia Sacra iuxta Vulgatam versionem (Stuttgart, 1994), p. 75: beatum iob qui adhuc apud Latinos iacebat in stercore et uermibus scatebat errorum, integrum immaculatumque gaudete. 128 Ps. Orig. 470ABC: percussit Iob plaga saevissima a pedibus usque ad caput 8 accepit testam ut raderet saniem suam.

92 LESLIE DOSSEY planned to strike his body with pain, make it ooze with wounds, consume it with maggots.129 Again, this suggests that the commentary was originally written in Latin, not Greek. It is unlikely that a Greek author would be familiar with scriptural accretions peculiar to the Old Latin Bible. From these and comparable examples,130 it would seem that despite his familiarity with Greek exegesis (and the Greek Bible), Pseudo-Origen wrote originally in Latin. This conclusion is strengthened by other characteristics of the text, which, although inconclusive individually, collectively point to a Latin original. There are sections in the commentary that no Greek original would have possessedasides such as in the language of the Greeks when using Greek loan words,131 and etymologies based on a Latin tradition.132 The longwinded style of the commentary
129 Ps. Orig. 469A usque ad ipsa pedum vestigia uno vulnere distillabant, una putredine detentus erat, iisdem vermibus scatebat, and 448C corpus ipsius percutiam dolore, liquefaciam vulneribus, consumam vermibus. Cf. 460A, 467D, 462C, 517D, 472B, 472D, 472D, 475B, 479A, 478D. The phrase teem with worms seems to be particularly distinctive to the Old Latin of Jb 2:8a. 130 Pseudo-Origen also shows familiarity with uniquely Old Latin readings in his commentary on Jb 1:7, Jb 1:19c, Jb 2:8b, and Jb 3:2. For Jb 1:7, he stays close to Greek when quoting the Scriptures: circuivi omnem terram quae sub caelo est, et veni (409A), cf. Jb 1:7c, ed. Ziegler, Septuaginta Iob, p. 209: Perielhv ` n cg ` n tg ` ~n kai e mperipatg saz tg `n u p ou rano ` n pa reimi. But in his discussion, he replaces the singular quae sub caelo est with the plural universa quae sub caelo sunt: 409B, 409C, and 410C. This plural is only otherwise attested by Latin authors: Oros. apol. 20.1 (CSEL 5.634) Circumiens terram et peragrans quae sub caelo sunt, adsum and the Liber Iob (PL 29.65). For Jb 1:19c, he keeps close to the Greek when quoting the verse: et cecidit super lios tuos et mortui sunt (429A), cf. kai oi pi ` paidi pesen g `e ki a e ` ta a sou, kai teleu tgsan. However, in his discussion he paraphrases a translation found only `e in Latin authors: ruina occupati sunt lii Job atque mortui, ruina occidit eius lios (443A, cf. 434B), cf. Collectio Escurialensis Sermo 14, ed. Leroy, p. 173: ruina eius lios epulantes occidit and other examples in the Appendix under Jb 1:19 cecidit super. For Jb 2:8b, the word acervus in Pseudo-Origens super acervum stercoris (471B, 471C, 472A, 473A, etc.) is not paralleled by the Greek (e pi ` tg az), but ~z kopri only by Latin authors: Ps. Fulg. Rusp. serm. 70 (PL 65.942D and 943A) and Collectio Escurialensis Sermo 14, ed. Leroy, p. 73. Pseudo-Origen uses acervus both in his scriptural quotations and his discussion. For Jb 3:2, Pseudo-Origen gives two translationsmaledicebat diem nativitatis suae (511A) which is attested only by Runus translation of Origen (Run. Orig. in Lev. 8.3, CB 29.397) and maledicebat diem suum without the nativitatis which follows the Septuagint (katgra sato tg `n g me ran au tou ~). He discusses both: 511A513B and 510C, 513C. 131 Ps. Orig. 428B: quemadmodum Graecorum lingua memoratur, triada vel homusion; 466D Adamas vero interpretatur ex Graeca lingua. 132 He derives the name Lucianus from the Latin lucidus: (471A): Ob hoc enim Lucianus cognominatus est, tanquam lucidus; also cited by Zeiller, Origines chre tiennes, p. 504, as evidence of a Latin origin. For diabolus, Pseudo-Origen gives the interpretion accusator: 455B Diabolus enim accusator interpretatur, as does Aug. quaest. Hept. 4.49 (CC 33.266); Chromat. in Matt. 8.2 (CC 9A.415);

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 93 is not that of a translator. He habitually decorates his prose with series of words equivalent in meaning (the rhetorical device of synonymia), as, for instance, in his description of Jobs plague, plaga saevissima, lamentabili, urenti, aigenti, agranti, incendenti, dolenti, omne supplicium in se habente (467D). It is unlikely that a translator would have resisted the temptation to abbreviate or that he would have completely left out the copulative conjunctions that a Greek original would have possessed.133 And although Pseudo-Origen occasionally uses words of Greek derivation, we dont nd those echoes of Greek grammar that few ancient translators could avoid.134 These characteristics, when conjoined to his scriptural tradition, make this, at best, an extraordinarily loose translation from the Greek. In addition to pointing to a Latin origin, Pseudo-Origens translation of the Bible is also our best clue for what part of the Latin West he wrote in. The Old Latin Bible varied regionally i.e. authors from North Africa tended to use di^erent variants than authors from Italy or Spain. It has already been noticed that Pseudo-Origens quotations from Isaiah come from an Old Latin Bible similar to that used by late North African authors

Ambrosiast. quaest. test. 2.4 (CSEL 50.19); see R. Maltby, Lexicon of Ancient Latin Etymologies (Lees, 1991), p. 185. Pseudo-Origens etymology of satanas has a"nities with Philippus: Ps. Orig. 455B Satanas vero resistens vel rebellis, aut etiam contumax; cf. Philipp. in Iob 41 (PL 26.790D), hoc fortassis de diabolo, de cujus verbis hic loquitur, intelligere possumus: etsi sit rebellis in Deum, et contumax, suum tamen tremens sentiat creatorem; cf. ibid. 26 (PL 26.688B). His etymology of adamas seems to derive ultimately from Pliny the Elder: Ps. Orig. 466D467A, Adamas vero est naturaliter talis lapis, cui neque ignis, neque ferrum, neque aliud quidquam praevalet _ Adamas vero interpretatur ex Graeca lingua, indomabilis, inexibilis, incomminutus, et breviter dicam, cui nec quidquam praevalet, neque percutiendo, neque adurendo; cf. Plin. nat. 37.57: simulque ignium uictrix natura et numquam incalescens, unde et nomeninterpretatione Graeca indomita uisaccepit; Isid. orig. 16.13.2: Hic nulli cedit materiae, nec ferro quidem nec igni, nec umquam incalecit, unde et nomen interpretatione Graeca indomita uis accepit; and Hier. in Am. 3.7.7/9 (CC 76.319): Adamas sui nominis lapis est, quem Latine indomitum possumus appellare, eo quod nulli cedat materiae, nec ferro quidem. However, Jerome says he is getting his information on adamas from Xenocrates, or, more likely, from a Greek exegete who cited Xenocrates: see H. Hagendahl, The Latin Fathers and the Classics (Studia Graeca et Latina Gothoburgensia 6) (Go teborg, 1958), pp. 2223. 133 For synonymia, see H. Lausberg, Handbuch der literarischen Rhetorik (Munich, 19732), pp. 32932. For the omission of copulative conjunctions as being indicative of a Latin origin, see Zeiller, Origines chre tiennes, p. 504. 134 His Greek loan words include agones (373A), monomachus (376D), phiala (394A) (all cited by Meslin, Ariens, 217), as well as scenopegiae (393B). I have not discovered him using genitive absolutes, singular verbs with neuter plural subjects, genitive with ab, or the indicative in the principal clause of unreal conditions, all of which are signs of translation: Courcelle, Late Latin Writers, pp. 578.

94 LESLIE DOSSEY (see n. 11). His quotations from Job also belong to a North African recension, though one that has been signicantly revised to better reect the Septuagint. We can see the North African avour of his book of Job in one of the verses already discussedJob 1: 21, naked I departed from the womb of my mother, naked I will go under the earth. PseudoOrigens precise wording ibo sub terram is only found otherwise in Cyprian and some Pseudo-Augustinian texts.135 Most other Old Latin authors used revertar in terram. Ambrose and Jerome dropped the terram altogether, since it was not in the Greek.136 So in this case, Pseudo-Origen was keeping close to Cyprian, as he does about 56 per cent of the time (for these percentages, see p. 96). A similar case is his translation of Job 1:12c (sed ipsum cave ne tangas). The cave ne tangas is found only in Cyprian, Quodvultdeus of Carthage, and Pseudo-Origen, although Augustines vide ne tangas comes close. The Italians Runus and Maximus Taurinensis II (AD c.45165) with their non contingas and ne tangas represent distinct (though related) recensions. Orosius follows Jeromes translation from the Septuagint (noli tangere), while Gregory I, Cassian, and Isidore use the Vulgate (in eum ne extenderis manum).137 Pseudo-Origens tendency to retain Cyprianic readings ts the pattern of North African authors, who were, on the whole, slow to adopt Jeromes translations, whether from the Greek or the Hebrew. Some of his most intriguing scriptural parallels occur with Donatists. For the word looked in have you looked at my servant Job in Job 2:3, the Donatist Petilianus (as quoted by Augustine) is the only other surviving author besides PseudoOrigen to use the verb respexisti.138 Petilianus is also the only match for Pseudo-Origens perseverans in simplicitate later in the same verse.139 The Donatist writer of the recently published Escurial sermons also used a translation of Job that was quite similar to Pseudo-Origens.140 Only here do we nd ad diabolum
See Jb 1:21 ibo sub terram in the Appendix for references. For Ambroses independent revision of Job to accord with the Greek, see F. C. Burkitt, The Old Latin and the Itala (Texts and Studies: Contributions to Biblical and Patristic Literature, ed. J. Armitage Robinson, vol. 4.3) (Cambridge, 1896). 137 See Jb 1:12 cave ne and tangas in the Appendix. 138 See Jb 2:3 respexisti in the Appendix. 139 See Jb 2:3 perseverans in simplicitate in the Appendix. 140 For the Donatist authorship of these sermons, see F.-J. Leroy, LHome lie Donatiste ignore ne dictine 107 (1997), pp. 25062, e du Corpus Escorial, Revue Be esp. 2527; see n. 26 for the edition.
136 135

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 95 for Job 1:7, instead of diabolo as in the other Latin authors.141 Only the Escurial preacher and Pseudo-Origen use the verb combussit in Job 1:16.142 The Escurial preacher provides the closest parallel to Pseudo-Origens paraphrase ruina occidit eius lios (443A) for Job 1:19.143 In fact, the variants of Job in the Escurial preacher are similar or identical to Pseudo-Origen 66 per cent of the time, more often than any other author. This resemblance to Donatist authors does not mean that Pseudo-Origen was using a Donatist Bible (or that such a thing as a separate Donatist Bible existed), but merely that Donatists tended to be, like him, conservative in their scriptural tradition. In several other verses, we nd Donatists, Pseudo-Origen, and the more traditional North African Catholics clustering together. In Job 2:8, only Pseudo-Origen, the Escurial preacher, and PseudoFulgentius (a Catholic of the Vandal age) describe Job as sitting on a heap (acervus) of dung, not merely in dung.144 PseudoOrigens use of multiplicasti to translate the Greek polla `e poi gsaz in Job 1:10d, is only paralleled by Quodvultdeus and the Escurial preacher.145 In the very well attested verse Job 1:8, PseudoOrigens phrasing animadvertisti ad and in terris is matched by Augustine, Quodvultdeus, the Escurial preacher, certain manuscripts of Cyprian, and one non-African, Ambrosiaster.146 The frequency with which Pseudo-Origens Bible resembles that of Vandal-period Catholics such as Quodvultdeus and Pseudo-Fulgentius is one reason for dating the commentary late. The verb scio in the phrase et scito si benedicat te (Job 1:11) is only otherwise found in Quodvultdeus. Augustine and Ambrose have a form of video, and other authors omit any verb before si.147 Pseudo-Fulgentius provides the only parallel for remansi in 1:15,

See Jb 1:7 ad diabolum in the Appendix. See Jb 1:15 combussit in the Appendix. See n. 130 and Jb 1:19 cecidit super in the Appendix. Jb 1:19 is one of those cases where Pseudo-Origen stays close to Greek when quoting Bible directly, but paraphrases the more traditional Old Latin in his discussion. 144 Ps. Orig. 471B sedebat super acervum stercoris, cf. Ps. Fulg. Rusp. serm. 70 (PL 65.942D, and 943A) and Collectio Escurialensis Sermo 14, ed. Leroy, p. 173. See Jb 2:8 acervum stercoris in the Appendix for other authors. There is no variant in the Greek that would explain acervus. 145 See Jb 1:10 multiplicasti in the Appendix. 146 Animadvertisti ad _ in terris is found in Quodv. prom 1.22.30 (CC 60.38); Cypr. mort. 10 (CC 3A.21, MS V R h); Cypr. testim. 3.14 (CC 3.105, MS V R African recension); Ambrosiaster quaest. test. 118.4 (CSEL 50.356); Aug. symb. 3.10 (CC 46.192); and Coll. Esc. Sermo 14, ed. Leroy, p. 171. 147 See Jb 1:11 scito si in the Appendix.
142 143

141

96 LESLIE DOSSEY instead of the more typical evasi or liberatus est.148 PseudoFulgentius is also the only match for prostravit in Job 1:20c.149 The unusual variant ne tetigeris in Job 2:6 only otherwise appears in the sixth-century North African bishop, Primasius.150 PseudoOrigen seems to be using a North African recension of Job that persisted into the sixth century. These impressions drawn from individual verses are conrmed by a tabulation of the variants. If we count how often PseudoOrigens translation of Job matches, or almost matches, the authors who attest fteen or more of the same variants, we get the following list: Pseudo-Origens variants of Job compared to other Latin authors:151 Author Similar or exact Exact matches only Collectio Escurialensis 66% (12/18) 44% (8/18) Pseudo-Maximus 60% (9/15) 40% (6/15) Cyprian 56% (24/43) 40% (17/43) *Augustine 53% (42/80) 41% (33/80) Ambrosiaster 50% (8/16) 38% (6/16) Pseudo-Fulgentius 50% (8/16) 31% (5/16) Quodvultdeus 48% (19/40) 40% (16/40) Pseudo-Basil 48% (29/60) 27% (16/60) Ambrose 43% (35/81) 31% (25/81) *Jerome 43% (35/82) 38% (31/82) Pelagius 43% (6/14) 36% (5/14) Liber Iob 41% (70/169) 32% (54/169) Runus 39% (14/36) 17% (6/36) Lucifer 38% (6/16) 31% (5/16) Caesarius 36% (9/25) 28% (7/25)
See Jb 1:15 remansi in the Appendix. See Jb 1:20 prostravit se in terra in the Appendix. 150 See Jb 2:6 ne tetigeris in the Appendix. 151 I have broken down verses to their component words or short phrases, following the method described in R. Gryson, Les citations scripturaires des oeuvres attribue que arien Maximinus, Revue Be ne dictine 88 (1978), es a le ve pp. 4580, at pp. 714. The data upon which these percentages are based is in the Appendix. The rst column of the table counts both similar and exact matches (the former are marked with * in the Appendix; the latter with ~). I have counted as similar those variants that were based on the same root, but di^ered slightly in word order, number, prex, or, in a few cases, tense or case. Augustine and Jerome are starred because my method of counting exaggerates their similarity to PseudoOrigen. Both of them use multiple translations of Job, and often quote several di^erent variants for the same verse. If they use the same variant as Pseudo-Origen on any occasion, I count them as matching him, even if they have di^erent variants on other occasions.
149 148

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA

97

Gaudentius Mozarabic Gloss Vulgate

35% (8/23) 26% (5/19) 18% (27/154)

17% (4/23) 21% (4/19) 17% (17/154)

The authors who have similar variants to Pseudo-Origen 50 per cent of the time or more are the Escurial preacher, PseudoMaximus, Cyprian, Augustine, Ambrosiaster, and PseudoFulgentius, in descending order of similarity. If we count only exact matches, the order shifts a little: the Escurial preacher still comes in rst, followed by Augustine, Cyprian, Pseudo-Maximus, Quodvultdeus, and Ambrosiaster (Pseudo-Fulgentius drops lower because he paraphrases Job more than he quotes it). There are a few surprises herethe late fourth-century monk of Rome, Ambrosiaster, and the anonymous author of the Epistula ad amicum aegrotum (Pseudo-Maximus) match Pseudo-Origen as often as the North African authors do.152 The preponderance of North African authors is nevertheless clear. A similar pattern emerges if we group the authors by region. By combining all authors from the same regionseven those who only quote a few verses of Job, we get the following percentages: Region North Africa153 Italy154 Gaul155 Spain156 Similar or same 51% (109/213) 38% (76/200) 38% (13/34) 22% (5/23) Same variants 39% (83/213) 26% (51/200) 32% (11/34) 22% (5/23)

152 The place of origin of the Epistula ad amicum aegrotum 1 (falsely attributed to Maximus of Turin) is a mystery, though a provenance from late fth or early sixthcentury Gaul has been suggested: see H. Savon, Une Consolation imite e de Se me, epistula 5, ad amicum aegrotum), ne ` que et de saint Cyprien (Pseudo-Je ro Recherches augustiniennes 14 (1979), pp. 15390, esp. pp. 18590. Savon doesnt, however, analyse the scriptural tradition. Its translation of Job seems even more Cyprianic than Pseudo-Origens. 153 Count based on Collectio Escurialensis (12/18, 8/18); Cyprian (24/43; 17/43); Augustine (42/80; 33/80); Pseudo-Fulgentius (8/16; 5/16); Quodvultdeus (19/40; 16/40); Fulgentius (1/6; 1/6); Primasius (1/1; 1/1); Verecundus (0/6; 0/6); and Victor of Vita (2/3; 2/3). I excluded Tertullian. 154 Count based on Ambrosiaster (8/16; 6/16); Ambrose (35/81; 25/81); Gaudentius (8/23; 4/23); Runus (14/36; 6/36); Lucifer (6/16; 5/16); Chromatius (2/7; 2/7); Leo (2/4; 2/4); Maximus of Turin (0/2; 0/2); Maximus II of Turin (1/6; 1/6); Paulinus of Nola (0/3; 0/3); Zeno of Verona (0/6; 0/6). I have excluded those authors who use the Vulgate. 155 Count based on Caesarius of Arles (9/25; 7/25); Ruricius (2/7; 3/7); Hilary of Poitiers (2/2; 1/2). 156 Count based on the Mozarabic Glosses (5/19; 4/19); Egeria (0/1; 0/1); and Gregory of Illiberis (0/3; 1/3). I have excluded Orosius (7/21; 5/21) and the sixthcentury Justus of Urgel (1/3; 2/3), both of whom rely on Jeromes translation from the Septuagint.

98 LESLIE DOSSEY There are obviously some problems with the samplefar fewer texts from Gaul or Spain quote the Old Latin Job than from North Africa and Italy. Illyricum and Britain are left out completely.157 Pseudo-Origens quotations from other parts of the Bible make it unlikely that he was Illyrian,158 but further comparisons with southern Gaul and Spain might be fruitful.159 Despite these gaps, this analysis suggests that Pseudo-Origens Bible came closer to that of North Africa than any other region. So from the examples discussed so far, it would appear that Pseudo-Origens translation of Job was closer to the North African recension than any other. Yet there are numerous instances where he seems to be modifying his translation of Job to correspond better to the Greek. Some of these are simple changes of numberfor example, hostiam (~husi an) instead of hostias in Job 1:5c160or minor reversals of word order: for example, tibi benedixerit (~se eu locg sei) instead of benedixerit tibi in
157 Pelagius Epistula ad Demetriadem could conceivably be used for British authors, but I would hesitate to suggest that Pelagius preserved his original Bible after years spent in Italy. 158 Pseudo-Origens quotations from other books of the Bible (though problematic because they were more vulnerable to modication by medieval scribes than his quotations from Job) seem to reect a di^erent subtradition than that of the Illyrian Arian authors. For example, note the di^erences between Pseudo-Origen and the Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum (dated to early fthcentury Illyricum): Mt 10:22: Ps. Orig. 398B qui toleraverit usque in nem hic salvus erit, cf. AN Mt h 48 (PG 56.906) qui perseveraverit usque in nem hic salvus erit; Ps 54:22: Ps. Orig. 380B molles fuerunt sermones super oleum, et ipsi sunt jacula, cf. AN Mt h 19 and 42 (PG 56.740 and 867) molliti sunt sermones eorum super oleum, et ipsi sunt jacula; Is 26:10: Ps. Orig. 402C: auferatur impius ne videat gloriam Domini; cf. AN Mt h 34 (PG 56.820) tollatur impius ne videat gloriam dei. Although there are only a few verses to compare, Pseudo-Origen also seems to di^er from the Fragmenta theologica Arriana e codice Bobiensi (CC 87.229265) and the Tractatus in Lucam (CC 87.199225); Ps 23:7: Ps. Orig. 402A tollite portas principes vestras et ut introeat rex gloriae, cf. Serm. Arian. fr.12 (CC 87.246): tollite portas principes uestri et eleuamini portae aeternales et introiuit rex gloriae; Mt 25:40: Ps. Orig. 394A quodcunque feceritis uni de minimis istis miserabilibus, mihi fecistis, cf. Serm. Arian. fr.12 (CC 87.247): quamdiu fecistis uni ex his fratribus minimis, mihi fecistis; Lc 1:19: Ps. Orig. 400B qui assisto in conspectu eius et dei, cf. Tract. in Luc. 1,18 (CC 87.203) qui adsto ante deum. 159 It has been suggested that Pseudo-Maximus, Epistula ad amicum aegrotum 1, and Pseudo-Basil, De consolatione in adversis, might come from late fth or sixthcentury Gaul: see n. 152 for Ps. Maximus, and Dekkers, Clavis Patrum Latinorum, 324 (# 999) for Ps. Basil. Both of these texts have scriptural a"nities to Pseudo-Origen. 160 See Ziegler, Septuaginta Iob, p. 208, and Jb 1:5 hostiam in the Appendix. Ambroses sacricium is probably a similar attempt to agree with the Greek in number: Ambr. sacr. 5.4.25 (CSEL 73.69).

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 99 Job 2:5b;161 dabit pro anima sua instead of pro anima sua dabit in dvka e n tg Job 2:4c;162 and dedi in manum tuam (~de xeiri sou) instead of in manus tuas do in 1:12b.163 In this last example, he also changed the tense of the verb (dedi) and the number of the noun (in manum) to accord with the Greek.164 More signicant are his additions (or subtractions) of entire words or phrases. He provides unique translations of some of the material that had been missing from the original Old Latin Job, most importantly the speech of Jobs wife (Job 2:9aa9dd).165 In Job 2:8a and Job 1:19, where the Old Latin diverged from the Septuagint, Pseudo-Origen gives literal renderings of the Greek.166 His translation of the well-attested verse Job 2:10b (quare ut una ex insipientibus mulieribus ita locuta es? 378A) adds the words quare and ita, which appear in no other Latin author, not even Cyprian or Quodvultdeus. They represent the Greek variants ina ti and ou tvz respectively.167 In his translation of Job 1:22 (nihil peccavit Job, neque in conspectu domini, neque in labiis suis 445C), the neque _ neque (ou de `n _ ou de `n) and word order come from a

161 See Ziegler, Septuaginta Iob, p. 217, and Jb 2:5 tibi benedixerit in the Appendix. Ambrose makes a similar change with his te _ benedicit: Ambr. in psalm. 36.30 (CSEL 64.94). 162 See Ziegler, Septuaginta Iob, p. 217 n. 4c, and Jb 2:4 dabit pro anima sua in the Appendix. Jerome has the same order as Pseudo-Origen, but Ambrose, Augustine, and Pseudo-Basil reverse it. 163 See Ziegler, Septuaginta Iob, p. 211 n. 12b, and Ps. Orig. 417A. Contrast in manus tuas do: Cypr. domin. orat. 26 (CC 3A.106), Quodv. prom. 1.22.30 (CC 60.38), Ps. Max. Taur. hom. 94 (PL 57.471C); and in manu tua do: Oros. apol. 20.6 (CSEL 5.635), Tert. fug. 2.3 (CC 2.1137), Liber Iob (PL 29.66). 164 He replaced the Old Latin plural (in manus tuas) with the singular in manum tuam. Jerome made the same change, though he used the ablative (as in the Greek), while Pseudo-Origen retained the accusative. See Jb 1:12 in manum tuam in the Appendix for references. For dedi, see n. 173. 165 The original Old Latin translation of Job (as represented by Cyprian) was based on a Septuagint that had left out a signicant portion of the Hebrew text. Theodotion is credited with restoring these sections to the Septuagint in the second century AD. Jeromes translation of the Septuagint included these Theodotion additions and made them available to Latins. See P.-M. Bogaert, Septante et versions grecques, Supple ment au Dictionnaire de la Bible, t. 12 (Paris, 1993), pp. 560 and 6247, and Burkitt, The Old Latin and the Itala. Pseudo-Origen, like Jerome, is translating a Septuagint that includes the Theodotion additions. He provides an independent translation of the speech of Jobs wife: Ps. Orig. 479B484D. 166 Jb 2:8 accepit testam ~ e pi laben o strakon; Jb 1:19 cecidit super ~ e pesen e `. See n. 130 and the Appendix for the Old Latin (which Pseudo-Origen knew). 167 Ziegler, Septuaginta Iob, p. 219, n. 10b, for the Greek. Quare and ita are omitted by Cyprian, Augustine, Ambrose, Victor of Vita, Gaudentius, etc.: see Jb 2:10 quare in the Appendix.

100 LESLIE DOSSEY Greek recension.168 The same is true for his word order for the various adjectives describing Job in Job 1:1 (sine querela, iustus, verax, dei cultor).169 Pseudo-Origens system seems to have been to retain as much of the Old Latin vocabulary as he could, while modifying the word order, number, and, occasionally, tenses to accord with the Greek. One may question whether Pseudo-Origen was really making these changes himself rather than relying on a previous revision of the Latin Job, the most obvious candidate being Jeromes. Jerome, I suspect, did inuence him.170 Yet Pseudo-Origen was basing some of his revisions on a di^erent recension of the Septuagint than Jerome, specically the Lucianic recension (common to the area of Constantinople and Antioch) rather than Origens Hexapla.171 The quare and ita in Job 2:10b are Lucianic; nothing equivalent to them appears in Jeromes translation of the Septuagint or in the Old Latin. The ut in the same verse may represent the Lucianic v z as opposed to the mainstream Septuagint v sper (Jeromes tanquam).172 The dedi in Job 1:12 corresponds to the Lucianic de dvka rather than the present tense found in the mainstream Septuagint, Jerome, and the Old
168 Ps. Orig. 445C; Ziegler, Septuaginta Iob, p. 215, n. 22bzou de e n toi lesin ~z xei au tou ~. He retains the vocabulary of Cyprian: Cyp. testim. 3.6 (CC 3.94): nihil peccauit Iob labiis suis in conspectu dei. 169 See Ziegler, Septuagint Iob, p. 207, n. 1b, a lgh./a m. di k. tr. in Chrysostom and others. The Old Latin authors put either iustus or verus rst: see Jb 1:1 sine querela, iustus in the Appendix. Pseudo-Origen himself seems to be aware of an alternative word-order. In Moses speech at the beginning of the commentary, he puts iustus rst, describing Job as justus et verax et sine querela (375A). 170 In Jb 2:9b, Pseudo-Origen comes closer to Jeromes Liber Iob than to Augustine or Gaudentius: compare quousque sustines (Me xri ti seiz) in Ps. noz karterg Orig. to quousque sustinebis in the Liber Job; quamdiu pateris in Augustine, and et ecce quae pateris in Gaudentius: for references, see Jb 2:9, quousque sustines in the Appendix. Pseudo-Origen is also notably similar to Jerome in his translation of Jb 29:17 and Jb 2:4. I suspect that when he was modifying his translation to get closer to the Greek, he sometimes used Jeromes Liber Job as a crutch. 171 For this Lucianic or Antiochene recension of the Septuagint in general, see P.-M. Bogaert, Septante et versions grecques, Supple ment au Dictionnaire de la Bible, t. 12 (Paris: 1993), pp. 5525, and, with specic reference to Job, 626. For a discussion of Pseudo-Origens Lucianic variants, see Dieu, Le texte du Job, pp. 22730 and 254; Ziegler, Introduction to Septuaginta Iob, p. 117; and D. Hagedorn, Introduction to Hiobkommentar des Arianers Julian, p. lxxiv, n. 9. The Lucianic Septuagint is named after the very saint Lucian of Antioch to whom Pseudo-Origen refers with such veneration, but its origin probably had little to do with Lucian. Other than Pseudo-Origen, John Chrysostom and Julian the Arian are the most important witnesses for the Lucianic Job. 172 Pseudo-Origen uses ut when he rst quotes the verse, then later switches to tanquam: quare ut (Ps. Orig. 486B, 487C; alt. quare sicut 487B, cur tanquam 487D,

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 101 Latin.173 The word order of Job 1:1 and Job 1:22 are the same as in Chrysostom (one of the main witnesses of the Lucianic Job), but di^erent from Jerome and the mainstream Septuagint.174 All told, scholars have identied 14 Lucianic variants in Pseudo-Origens translation of Job, and I have found another three that reect a Bible particularly close to John Chrysostoms.175 Pseudo-Origen may have inherited some of these variants from the Old Latin,176 but the others he was introducing either directly from the Greek or, possibly, from a Latin revision 488CD, 489B, 490A) una ex insipientibus mulieribus ita locuta es? Other Old Latin authors have tanquam, quasi, sicut, or velut: see Jb 2:10 tanquam in the Appendix. For this use of ut compare Pseudo-Origens unique translation of Jb 2:9da: ego, ut vaga, et habitu ancillae ambulans. 173 Ziegler, Septuaginta Iob, p. 211, n. 12b, for the Lucianic de dvka. For do in the Old Latin, see Jb 1:12 dedi in the Appendix. 174 Ziegler, Septuaginta Iob, p. 207, n. 1b, for Jb 1:1, and p. 215, n. 22b, for Jb 1:22. 175 Ziegler, Introduction to Septuaginta Iob, p. 117, lists Pseudo-Origens Lucianic variants as Jb 1:6 factum est quasi; 1:7 ad diabolum; 1:12 dedi; 1:13 et factum est; 1:15 in ore gladii; 1:18 ad iob; 1:20b et aspersit terram super caput suum; 1:21e in saecula; 2:10b quare ut and ita; 2:11b de civitate sua; 2:11f simul ad eum; 3:1 post haec; 3:17 requieverunt. In addition to these, note Jb 1:22b neque in conspectu domini neque in labiis suis; 1:1 sine querela, iustus, verax, dei cultor (word-order); and 2:10czautem (~men in Chrysostom). 176 Some of the so-called Lucianic variants are remnants of the early Septuagint that were purged by subsequent revisers of the Greek: see P.-M. Bogaert, Les e ologique de tudes sur la Septante: Bilan et perspectives, Revue the Louvain 16 (1985), pp. 174200, at pp. 1856. Of Pseudo-Origens 17 Lucianic variants, three were clearly not in the Old Latin: 1:12 dedi; 2:10b quare ut and ita. The case of Jb 1:21e is ambiguous. Pseudo-Origen is not alone in adding the Lucianic variant in saecula; it also appears in Pelagius, Hilary of Poitiers, Jeromes translation of Origen, and various anonymous texts. But the earliest Old Latin authors, including those (Cyprian, Quodvultdeus) whom Pseudo-Origen most resembles, leave it out. See Jb 1:21 in saecula in the Appendix; and Ziegler, Septuaginta Iob, p. 214, n. 21e. For eight other variants, there are too few early Latin attestations to compare: Jb 1:6 factum est quasi; 1:13 et factum est; 1:15 in ore gladii; 1:18 ad iob; 1:20 et aspersit terram super caput suum; 2:11 de civitate sua; 2:11 simul ad eum; 3:1 post haec. The remaining two may have existed in the Old Latin, though there is no early evidence for it. Pseudo-Origens requieverunt ab rcg ira indignationis for Jb 3:17a reects the Lucianic e pausan humv `n o ~z (Ziegler, Septuaginta Iob, p. 225 n. 17a) as does the Mozarabic Glosss mitigaverunt furorem irae: J. Ziegler, Randnoten aus der Vetus Latina des Buches Iob in spanischen Vulgatabibeln (Sitzungsberichte. Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Jr. 1980, H. 2) (Munich, 1980), p. 11. Both Pseudo-Origen and the Gloss may have inherited this variant from the Old Latin (though clearly not from the same recension). Such a scenario is also possible for Jb 1:7a. Pseudo-Origen has the Lucianic ad diabolum instead of the dative of the mainstream Septuagint: Ziegler, Septuaginta Iob, p. 209, n. 7a. Of the other Latin witnesses, one (Augustine) has diabolo; the other (the Donatist Escurial preacher) has ad diabolum: see Jb 1:7 ad diabolum in the Appendix.

102 LESLIE DOSSEY for which he is the only surviving witness. Rather than using some otherwise unattested Latin translation of Job, I believe that Pseudo-Origen systematically changed his Old Latin Bible to agree with what he saw in his Antiochene sources.177 Pseudo-Origens scriptural revisions may hold the key for understanding the commentarys preface (which for all Meslins e^orts to the contrary, seems to be by the same author as the rest of the text).178 The preface criticizes those who had previously translated this book of the blessed Job (beati Iob librum): we
177 This is the proposal of Nautin, Revue de lhistoire des religions 177 (1970), p. 81: Car on peut encore se demander si lauteur du commentaire latin navait pas sous les yeux un commentaire grec, dont il na certes pas fait une simple traduction, mais dont il a pu sinspirer et sur lequel il a pu traduire les lemmes bibliques. 178 Even though the preface if found in all the manuscripts, Meslin, Ariens, 2068, following Erasmus, labelled it a medieval forgery, largely on the grounds of style. It admittedly has a more complex and stilted sentence structure than the rest of the commentary: note the splitting of antequam into ante _ quam (omnem sapientem peto _ ut ante hunc prologum relegat, quam ad hujus libri lectionem accedat) and the clumsy sandwiching of relative clauses and ablative absolutes (Quod etiam peto te _ ut etiam tu illa mentis vivacitate, atque sancti animi curiositate ad eorum quae dicta sunt rationem relecta pervenias lectione). But in theme and vocabulary, the preface resembles the rest of the text. It begins with a long medical metaphor comparing bad translation to bad medicine: skilled doctors ( periti medici) need to understand the nature of the malady so that they wont give medicine meant for a hand to the head. Similarly, a translator needs to understand the meaning (sensus) of the text. We nd this interest in both medicine and translation later in the commentary. The theme of translation resurfaces immediately, when Pseudo-Origen discusses Moses translation of the book of Job (the beati Iob scriptura) from the Syriac into Hebrew (373C). His later medical metaphors display a similar fondness for listing body parts and a concern about misapplied treatment, see 502B, 513B, 469A, 468C, and 507A. Much of the vocabulary in the preface is found later in the commentary. The preface imagines the book rolling (devolutus fuerit) into the hands of future readers. Moses describes how Job was rolled (devolutus est) into a dung heap (375C). The preface urges his diligens reader diligenter to examine his translation, which he with Gods help has diligenter completed. Moses had diligenter translated Job, and had diligenter been able to know about the creation of the earth (373D). Those who sought diligentius would nd that Jobs passion resembed Christ (374D). Other distinctive words in the preface that occur later in the commentary: superue, cf. superuum 506A, superua 419D, 429B, 439, 441B, 468C; omnem sapientem peto, cf. hoc intelligere debet omnis sapiens 426C, quis sapiens reprehendere aggrediatur 510B, quod nullus ex sapientibus recipit 496A; periti/imperiti: o viri periti (382A, 415D, etc.). Most of the sentence constructions are also paralled by later parts of the commentary: the use of quia for because and cum for when; peritorum mos est, cf. mos est scripturarum 406B; ad eorum quae dicta sunt rationem _ pervenias, cf. ad hoc pervenit 499B; ad hujus libri lectionem accedat cf. ad incorruptionem accedens 403A. As far as I can determine, the construction ante _ quam does not occur elsewhere, though Pseudo-Origen does use ante adverbially (499D, 501A, 413C, etc.). Taken as a whole, I see nothing to prevent this preface from being by the same author as the rest of the commentary.

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 103 have learned or rather we have read that some men had translated this book of the blessed Job, which is at hand, from Greek into Latin without (using) Latin speech.179 It goes on to say, that the previous translators strayed far from the veracity and method of translation.180 If the greatest of his learned readers would like to study them, you will nd beyond a doubt that they left out many things, and added a great many things superuously.181 The author challenges the reader to compare previous translations to his own so that he would learn whom he should read. He himself has stayed close to the Greek: I swear that I in no way have strayed from the authority of the truth, but have preserved completelyin no way corruptedthe integrity of these things, just as they were placed by the one who rst authored them.182 Scholars reading this preface have universally assumed that the beati Iob librum referred to was the commentary itself. The author of the preface was explaining (or pretending) that he had more accurately translated a Greek commentary that had already been translated before. Yet to argue that the author of the preface was translating the commentary as a whole, we would have to believe that multiple translators had worked on an unnamed Greek commentary on Job, which needed to be translated with extreme veracity. This is possibleespecially if the text in question were thought to be Origensbut the ancient theory of translation was not so literalist as this, at least in the case of non-biblical texts.183 On the other hand, a concern for preserving a precise word order and the authority of the truth would be characteristic of biblical translation. I suggest that the book of the blessed Job referred to in the preface was the scriptural book of Job, not the commentary. On the face of it, this might seem to posit a rather unlikely scenario of the preface being detached from a scriptural translation (which was then lost) and becoming attached to the commentary. But the connection

179 Ps. Orig. Prologus (3712): cognovimus vel potius legimus hunc qui in manibus est beati Job librum aliquos de Graeco in Latinum non Latino vertisse sermone. 180 Ibid. quia a veritate atque regula interpretationis longe discesserunt. 181 Ibid. Invenies procul dubio multa eos praetermisisse, necnon et addidisse superue plurima. 182 Ibid. Spondeo sane me a veritatis auctoritate nullatenus discessisse, sed sicut ab illo posita sunt qui haec prior edidit, ita eorum status integritatem in nullo vitiatam penitus reservasse. 183 See L. G. Kelly, The True Interpreter: A History of Translation Theory and Practice in the West (Oxford, 1979).

104 LESLIE DOSSEY between scriptural commentary and Scripture was so close in late antiquitythe former sometimes being little more than marginalia to the latterthat this scenario is not impossible. If the preface is referring to the scriptural book of Job, then it can be taken at its word. For someone convinced that the Septuagint as current in Syria and Constantinople was the most accurate, Pseudo-Origen does preserve the book of Job in its integrity, placing things as he (Moses) rst authored it. Previous Latin translations such as Jeromes (who makes use of Origens Hexapla) or the Old Latin would seem to have left out many things and added superuous things. Putting Pseudo-Origen in the dual role of scriptural translator and exegete ts with his peculiar portrayal of Moses at the beginning of the commentary. Moses had, according to PseudoOrigen, translated the book of Job from Syriac into Hebrew so that his people would have a model of endurance during their captivity in Egypt.184 Moses had then, himself, added the narrative section of the book (Job 13.3Pseudo-Origen believed that the beginning of the book had a di^erent author than the rest). Moses had, thirdly, preached on JobPseudo-Origen quotes one of Moses sermons, a sermon that suspiciously contained a number of themes dear to Pseudo-Origens heart (375). The point is that Pseudo-Origen has fashioned Moses in his own imageinto a narrator, exegete, and translator of the story of Job, for the encouragement of a su^ering people. Whether my interpretation of the preface is correct or not, several conclusions can be drawn from this analysis of PseudoOrigens translation of Job. This text was originally written in Latin. There would be no reason for a Greek author to comment on phrases that did not exist in the Greek Bible. Pseudo-Origens original translation of Job belongs to a North African recension of the Old Latin Bible, as found in authors such as Cyprian, the Donatist Escurial preacher, Quodvultdeus of Carthage, and Pseudo-Fulgentius. He was revising the Latin to accord with a Lucianic Septuagint, much like the one used by the Antiochene exegetes. I suggest that it is because of this revision that the preface claims to be translating this book of the blessed Job from the Greek into Latin. Alternatively, the author has, for reasons of his own, chosen to pass o^ an original work of exegesis as a translation.

184

Ps. Orig. 373BC.

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 105 I I I . P U T T I N G P S E U D O -O R I G E N I N A SI X T H - CE N T U R Y N O R T H A F R I C A N CO N T E X T

The author that has emerged from this analysis was an unusual man. He could be accused of at least two heresiesArianism and Pelagianism. He was a scriptural scholarnot on the level of Jerome, certainly, but able to compare the Greek Septuagint to several di^erent Latin translations. He was an exegete of considerable erudition, who didnt mind using his learning for mundane purposes, such as to telling wives how they should behave to their in-laws. And he possessed a self-assurance bordering on arroganceputting himself in the role of Moses for his people. We have now reached the most speculative part of this article: when would an exegete of this sort have been most likely to exist? For placing him in a specic region, we have little to go on other than his Bible. He used a North African recension of the Old Latin Job, which suggests that he was either writing in North Africa or had recently emigrated from there. Considering the pastoral nature of the text, he may have been a bishop or priest, though the Western Arians did have a tradition of lay theologians.185 He was friendly towards barbarians (Job was one), but he does not identify himself as such. His Latin style would seem to mark him as a well-educated and condent Roman literate in Greek to such an extent that he may have even studied in the East. As for the terminus post quem of the text, his borrowings from Severianus of Gabala (. AD 40030)if the Pseudo-Chrysostom sermons on Job are really by Severianuswould point to the early fth century or after. His Pelagian tendencies (especially his recognition that his attitudes were controversial) also suggest a date after 400.186 The terminus ante quem would be the elimination of Arians from North Africa (and from most of the Mediterranean) in the decades after the Byzantine reconquest (53450). So the rough chronological boundaries for the commentary would be between AD 400 and 550. There are good reasons for placing him in the early end of this chronological range, as a number of previous scholars have

185 R. Mathisen, Barbarian Bishops and the Churches in barbaricis gentibus during Late Antiquity, Speculum 72 (1997), p. 692. 186 The Pelagian controversy began with the teachings of Runus the Syrian in Rome c.399402: see G. Bonner, Runus of Syria and African Pelagianism, Augustinian Studies 1 (1970), p. 35.

106 LESLIE DOSSEY done.187 His intellectual qualications are more typical of the early fth century than of the post-Roman period. In the early fth century, bilingualism in Greek and Latin was not yet unusual.188 Western Arians, such as the author of the Opus Imperfectum in Matthaeum, wrote exegesis that made use of Greek sources.189 They also, like Pseudo-Origen, held attitudes towards original sin that verged on Pelagianism.190 These scholarly, bilingual Arians are quite di^erent from the Arian clergy of post-Roman West, who appear to have mainly served the barbarian courts and were not noted for their learning in Latin, much less Greek.191 An early fth-century date would also help explain some of hints in the text that the intended audience was experiencing persecution. In the speech of Moses at the beginning of the commentary, Pseudo-Origen seems to speaking to men who had recently lost their positions and possibly their freedom: But though you su^er these things wrongfully from the Egyptians, being reduced to servitude, and punished by them (though) without crime, and unjustly a@icted, do not be disheartened nor succumb (375B). In a later passage, he complains about the
187 For a late fourth-century date, see Zeiller, Origines chre tiennes, p. 503; Ziegler, Introduction to Septuaginta Iob, p. 26; and P. Maraval, Job dans loeuvre `res, pp. 23 and 26. See also de Ze non de Ve rone, in Livre de Job chez les Pe A. Harnack, Geschichte der Altchristlichen Literature bis Eusebius, vol. 1.2 (Leipzig, 1893), p. 529, dating to AD 400. 188 For North Africans still knowing Greek in the early fth century, see Courcelle, Late Latin writers, p. 147. 189 For the Opus Imperfectums use of Origens Matthew commentary directly from the Greek, see F. Mali, Das Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum und sein Verha ltnis zu den Mattha uskommentaren von Origenes und Hieronymus (Innsbrucker Theologische Studien 34) (Innsbruck, 1991), pp. 3339. 190 For the Opus Imperfectums attitude towards free will and original sin, see F. W. Schlatter, The Pelagianism of the Opus Imperfectum in Matthaeum, Vigiliae Christianae 41 (1987), pp. 26785, esp. pp. 2803. The Opus Imperfectums theology, however, di^ers from Pseudo-Origens in signicant ways. On the one hand, it emphasizes the operation of grace more than Pseudo-Origen (in fact, its theology should probably be termed semi-Pelagian). On the other hand, it has a far more negative view of marriage. 191 For the educational level of the barbarian clergy, see Mathisen, Barbarian Bishops, pp. 6867 and p. 692. In the 480s, the Arian patriarch of Africa, Cyrilla, pretended to be unable to understand a Latin text: Vict. Vit. Hist. pers. 2.55 (CSEL 7.45). He in fact knew Latin, but the pretence suggests that not all the Arian clergy did. There is some evidence that the Vandals used a Germanic liturgy. A Vandalperiod text, Collatio Augustini cum Pascentio Ariano, gives the equivalent of domine, miserere among the barbari as sihora armen: Ps. Aug. coll. c. Pasc. (PL 33.1163) and G. Eis, Der wandalische Gebetsruf Fro ja arme s, Forschungen und Fortschritte 34 (1960), pp. 1835. Nevertheless, I will argue that the educational level of Arians had changed by the sixth century.

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 107 homoousians spreading through the world in the guise of shadows and attacking and preying upon the Church.192 At the end, he looks forward to the time of the resurrection when the indignation and fury of the impious will rest.193 We could imagine this commentary, like the Opus Imperfectum in Matthaeum, being written for a select group of Arian diehards, who were livinglike Jobas just men in the middle of the unjust, after the imperial laws against them had gone into e^ect. But other aspects of the commentary point later. For one, if Pseudo-Origen were writing in early fth-century North Africa, it is hard to imagine whom he would have been writing for. He seems to be addressing second or third-generation Arians (O children of the faithful), who possessed some education and belonged to an established Arian church.194 Such Latin Arians are known to have existed in Illyricum, but, aside from some barbarian federates and administrative outsiders, there werent many Arians in North Africa before the Vandal conquest.195 Secondly, if the attribution of the Job sermons of PseudoChrysostom to Severianus is correct, an early fth-century date would mean Pseudo-Origen was borrowing from Severianus (a rm Nicene) during Severianus own lifetime, rather than, as would seem more likely, after the real authorship of the sermons had been forgotten. Pseudo-Origens reference to his exegetical sources as antiqui (374B) also implies a signicant passage in time between them and him. Thirdly, his political assumptions correspond better to the post-Roman world. Except for one reference to how victors
192 Ps. Orig. 428B, Sic namque etiam nunc memorata trionyma haeresis, praesertim praedatur atque expugnat Ecclesiam. Zeiller, Origines chre tiennes, p. 503, takes this as evidence of an early origin. 193 Ps. Orig. 520A: Illic enim requiescit eatenus indignatio atque furor impiorum. 194 In Ps. Orig. 384, he addresses his audience as o lii religiosorum _ o nati delium. Some level of education is suggested by his tendency to call them learned men (o viri periti): 382A, 415D, etc. As for the established nature of their church, he divides them into lay faithful and clergy (sacerdotes, clerus): celebramus nimirum religiosos cum sacerdotibus convocantes, deles una cum clero (517B) and expects them to attend church regularly: 393D, 512B, 517B. For sacerdos being the preferred term for prelates among the post-Roman Arians, see Mathisen, Barbarian bishops, p. 684 (for Visigothic Gaul) and pp. 6878 (for Vandal Africa). 195 The known Arians in pre-Vandal North Africa are Pelagia, the wife of Bonifatius, comes of Africa (Aug. epist. 220.4, CSEL 57.434); the Arian bishop Maximinus (probably an Illyrian) who debated Augustine in 427/28: see A. Mandouze, Maximinus 10, Prosopographie chre tienne du Bas-Empire 1 (Paris, 1982), p. 731 (henceforth PCBE); and Pascentius, comes domus regiae between 404 and 411, who debated with Augustine in Carthage: Pascentius 1, PCBE 1, pp. 8279.

108 LESLIE DOSSEY received their crowns in a prone position before imperatores,196 he speaks of kings (reges), not emperors.197 This terminology, by itself, may not be signicant; a Hellephone author could have used rex as the equivalent of emperor, as in the Greek basileus. However, he envisions a political world where a number of reges and lesser princes rule instead of one emperor. Job and his friends are described as duces provinciae or reges.198 Pseudo-Origen
196 He compares Job throwing himself on the ground and adoring God to victors receiving their crowns before emperors in a prone position of adoration: Nam et ante imperatores qui victores exstiterunt, non stantes, sed deorsum adorantes coronam accipiunt (438B). The only parallels I have found to this description are Belisarius triumph of 534 as described by Procopius, and John Troglitas reception by Justinian as described by the African poet, Corippus. When Belisarius was allowed a triumph in Constantinople after conquering the Vandals, he paraded with the spoils and then performed proskynesis before Justinian in the company of the conquered king Geilimer: see Procopius, de bello Vandalico 2.9, ed. J. Haury (Lipsiae, 1962), p. 458; discussed by M. McCormick, Eternal Victory (Cambridge, 1986), pp. 1268, who considers it possible that Tribonian, who controlled court ceremony at the time, thought he was following an ancient model. There is no mention of Belisarius being given a crown. Corippus, Iohannidos 1,116120, ed. J. Diggle and F. Goodyear, 8, describes John Troglita returning from victories in the East to Constantinople and kissing the emperor Justinians feet: uictorque recurrens / aurea Romanae tetigit mox limina portae. / principis ante pedes gaudens stetit ore sereno / respexit famulum. pedibus celer ille benignis / oscula laeta dedit. Again, there is no mention of crowns. It is possible that Pseudo-Origen (as well as the Corippus) was reading some antiquarian source for the ceremony. My thanks to M. McCormick for the reference to Corippus and for his assistance in interpreting Pseudo-Origens meaning. 197 With contemporary reference, Ps. Orig. 441A idem est introitus omnibus, et exitus similis, sive rex, sive famulus; and 445C quis regum a saeculo talia bella peregit, o viri. He frequently gives Job the trappings of a king: 500D regale solium non erat, diadema non erat, gloria neque vestis regia et ministri undique circumdarent non fuerunt; 483A (Jobs wife speaking) nam intra palatia nutrita, et in regno vivens, et in principatu atque opulentia degens; 472D quam olim de regni gloria atque multitudine circumdantium se populorum complacens; 471C regni corona ablata est mihi; 436A conscindere pretiosas atque a regales meas vestes. God the Father is also a Rex throughout the commentary: 473C 449C, 393A, etc. 198 Ps. Orig. 379C for Job; 504C for his friends ( principes regionum, atque provinciarum suarum domini, ac duces gentis suae). Pseudo-Origen is unique in calling Job a dux provinciae. He may be thinking of a section in Genesis where the descendants of Esau are g cemo nez: Gen. 36:1516 g cemo nezEliQa `z e n cg ldoumai a, etc. The term g cemv ` n in this section is translated as dux in Runus: Run. Orig. in Num. 19.1 (CB 30, Origenes 7, 177). In addition to this scriptural use of dux, the title dux provinciae was used for leaders of the provincial armies in the fth centuryfor example, the dux provinciae of Mauritania Sitifensis in a Novel of Valentinian III (a shortening of the title dux limitis prouinciae): N. Ual. 13.1; reference from P. S. Barnwell, Emperor, Prefects and kings: The Roman West, 395565 (London, 1992), p. 38. The duces of Visigothic Gaul and Ostrogothic Italy appear to be a continuation of the o"ce: ibid. p. 79 and pp. 1523, although sometimes the barbarian kings themselves were also called duces.

109 THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA considers it natural for all peoples (gentes) to have such duces provinciae or reges, who exercised legislative as well as military authority.199 The portrayal in 379C of a barbarian dux/rex sanctioning laws strikes me as particularly indicative of a postRoman date.200 Pseudo-Origens political terminology in general does not seem late imperial. He makes no reference to civilian governors (proconsuls, consulares, praesules) or to the municipal e liteboth of which were still important in North Africa and Italy in the early fth century. Nor does he mention any imperial o"cials. The terms he uses for men in powerrex, dux, iudex, princeps, illustris, and, indeed, imperatorare all ones that were common in the post-Roman West.201 And, nally, although Pseudo-Origen clearly considered the homoousian heretics his enemy, the bulk of the commentary does not reect a persecution mentality. He warned his audience not to
199 Ps. Orig. 505A: secundum consuetudinem omnium gentium per singulas civitates et regiones reges fuerunt, atque duces provinciarum, et singuli in regione sua regnabant atque imperabant. Although it is possible that he is using gentium here to mean specically barbarian peoples, his use of gens elsewhere in the commentary is general: 453A: pervolas enim pelagus et aerem et penetras omnes gentes, provincias, ac regiones; 388B (in reference to Jobs charitable activities) ideo et plurimo indigebat ministerio ad curandum, ad intendendum, ad circumeundem, itemque ad dandum, ad distribuendum, ad ministrandum in gentibus, ad defendendum oppressos; 414D Sit benedictum in angelis et in hominibus, in coelestibus virtutibus, in spiritibus atque in omnibus justorum animabus, in gentibus et in omnibus delium congregationibus. 200 Job, as dux provinciae, both decreed laws and made judgements: Nam cum esset dux ac princeps provinciae suae, et leges sanxit, et judicia judicavit (379C). The earliest known legislative activity by barbarian kings is the decisions of the Visigothic king Theoderic (AD 41951), referred to in the late fth-century Code of Euric: see R. Collins, Early Medieval Spain (London, 1983), pp. 279. The barbarian kings do not appear to have immediately called their acts leges, but rather edicta: see Barnwell, Emperor, Prefects, and Kings, p. 74: It is signicant that Eurics law book is called an edictum, and makes no explicit claim to be lex in the sense of imperial or rescript law. Job is sanctioning leges. 201 The classic example of a ruler in Vandal Africa taking the term dux (and, indeed, imperator) is the inscription of the Moorish prince Masties dux, ann(is) LXVII, et imp(e)r(ator) ann(is) LX: AE (1945) n. 97; C. Courtois, Les Vandales et lAfrique (Paris, 1955), p. 382. Pseudo-Origen uses iudex in the sense of governor: Ps. Orig. 406A, nemo de veris ac justis principibus atque judicibus. Iudex is the primary term used for o"cials enforcing the laws in Vandal legislation: Edict. Hunir. apud Vict. Vit 3.1112 (CSEL 7.77) and 3.13 (CSEL 7.78): iudices autem prouinciarum. He uses illustris when discussing earthly nobility versus spiritual: Ps. Orig. 389C ex Dei benedictione atqve colloquio nobilis erat et illustris. Illustris shows up as a title in the Latin AnthologyAnth. Lat. 248 (R. 254), ed. Bailey, p. 186, the illustris primiscriniarius Victorianus, and in Edict. Hunir. apud Vict. Vit 3.10 (CSEL 7.76), as the highest rank. Pseudo-Origen use princeps when he wants a generic term for sovereign, which could include kings and dukes as well as emperors: 406A; 379C; 504C; 469C. Corippus frequently calls Justinian princeps in the Iohannidos.

110 LESLIE DOSSEY take communion with heretics or attend their churches, but never implies they were under political compulsion to do so.202 He fully expects them to celebrate Easter and feastdays together, his only concern being that the poor be welcomed as well as the rich.203 He would like his people to come to church more often than they do, but attributes their failure to do so to complacency, not fear.204 In passages where he would have had excellent opportunities to compare Jobs loss of status and property to his own peoples legal persecution, the worst hardships he imagines for them are their Lenten fasting, and the ordinary misfortunes of life.205 What worries him more than the Nicenes are his own peoples power struggles against each another (see pp. 11819). Taken as a whole, this seems to be a text written at a time when Arians were part of the ruling e lite rather than a persecuted minority, though a ruling e lite conscious that their predominance might not last. So I think that, as Frede has already suggested (see n. 11), Pseudo-Origen was writing in Vandal North Africa. But I would not place him in the middle of the fth century, when the Arian clergy were still predominately Vandal and, in foreign a^airs, Geiseric dominated the western Mediterranean. He would better suit the end of the Vandal kingdom, particularly the reign of Hilderic (523530). By this period, the Arian church in Africa had
202 Ps. Orig. 382A: sic oportet etiam nos, o viri periti, in de ambulare, in de stare, in de perseverare, indelitati atque indelibus non appropinquare, neque communicare, neque conventiculis eorum neque collectis. 203 Ps. Orig. 393D, and Ps. Orig. 517B celebramus nimirum religiosos cum sacerdotibus convocantes, deles una cum clero, invitantes adhuc egenos et pauperes, pupillos et viduas saturantes, ut at festivitas nostra in memoriam requiei defunctis animabus, quarum memoriam celebramus. 204 He criticizes those ignorant and irreligious men who are called to hasten to church, but fail to go, saying I have eaten yesterday, I will eat tomorrow: Hoc scilicet ignorant plerique insipientium atque irreligiosorum, qui admonentur festinare ad templum Dei, qui vocantur ad Ecclesiam Dei accelerare, et terribilem Dei gloriam adorare, et aut pro neglectu habent, aut in vacuitatem ducunt, aut alias excusationes inveniunt dicentes Hesterna manducavi, crastina manducem _ (512B). 205 For how fasting and abstinence allows them to share Jobs su^erings: Ps. Orig. 374D. When Job blesses God after losing his children and property, he compares those who lose money or children, or who fall into sickness or poverty: 414A Sic oportet omnes Christiano, atque omnes credentes dicere et facere et cogitare in omnibus quae eos circumdederint, atque eis occurrerint, sive pecunias perdant, sive lii auferantur, sive paupertas incumbat, sive inrmitas immittatur. He calls upon God to protect them in their tribulations, particularly those relating to sickness and journeys: 508A Omnes autem causas nostras sive dolorum, sive languorum, sive poenarum, sive tribulationum, sive viarum, sive itinerum, sive ingressuum, sive egressuum cuncta Deo commendemus, cuncta Deo committamus, ut Dominus custodiat omnes ingressus atque exitus nostros. None of this sounds like religious persecution.

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 111 become a fusion of Roman and Vandal elements unparalled in the post-Roman West. Yet at the same time, other western kingdoms most notably the Frankswere going over to the Nicenes and, in Africa itself, a pro-Nicene king began to restore the homoousian church and entered into alliance with Constantinople. By the early sixth century, a scholarly Arian, literate in Greek as well as Latin and not specically identied with the Vandal population, would have been unusual, but not impossible, partly because so many Nicenes had gone over to the Arian side. From the 480s on, the Vandal kings made a concerted e^ort at conversion, and by the early sixth century had achieved some success, particularly in e lite circles eager for government promotion.206 As conversions of the non-Vandal population increased, so did the level of education of Arian intellectuals. We nd such educated non-Vandal Arians in the polemics of Fulgentius of Ruspe. For example, an Arian named Fastidiosus wrote a sermon against the homoousians during the 520s. He was a former Nicene monk and priest who had fallen into fornication (possibly marriage) and become an Arian.207 Fabianus, another of Fulgentius Arian opponents, prided himself on his latinitas and even appears to have read Greek (see p. 115). From a Byzantine North African source, we hear of the scholasticus Mocianus, who had been an Arian when the Vandals were in power.208 The names of these menFabianus, Fastidiosus, Mocianussuggest a Roman, not Germanic ethnicity.209 Pseudo-Origen would have tted

206 Already in AD 488, Pope Felix had to address problem of Catholics who had been rebaptized as Arians: see J. Moorhead, Theoderic in Italy (Oxford, 1992), p. 90. Fulgentius of Ruspe complains of the Arians converting Catholics through gifts and o"ces: Fulg. Rusp. psalm. abeced. 236^. (CC 91A.883); rem. pecc. 22.1 (CC 91A.671); and inc. 37 (CC 91.343). One of Fulgentius own relatives was an Arian bishop in Sicca Veneria: Vita Fulg. Rusp. 11.22 (PL 65.128A). One of the last Vandal king Geilimers most faithful subjects was the crammateu ` z Bonifatius, a Li k Bufaki rmv menoz, who was entrusted with the royal treasury: buz, e ou o Procopius, De Bello Vandalico 2.4, ed. Haury, p. 437. Given Geilimers strong Arian ideology, Bonifatius was almost certainly an Arian. After the Byzantine reconquest, Pope Agapetus (AD 535) set up procedures for receiving penitent Arian converts back into church: Epist. pontif. Agapetus 2 P (PL 66.44); Moorhead, Theodoric in Italy, p. 90, n. 111. 207 See Fulg. Rusp. c. Fastid. 1.1 (CC 91.283). 208 Facundus, Contra Mocianum 64 (CC 90A.415): qui Uandalis regnantibus Arianus fuit; deinde imperio succedente Romano, cum tempore uersus est ut Catholicus uideretur. Mocianus seems to have followed the political winds Facundus was writing against him for supporting the imperial position in the Three Chapters controversy. 209 Fabianus (5Fabius) is an old Roman name dating back to the Republic: see Fabius, in J. Perin, ed. Onomasticon totius latinitatis, t. 2 (Patavii, 1920), 5968A;

112 LESLIE DOSSEY comfortably among these sixth-century collaboratorsan educated man possibly of Catholic or Donatist background, friendly towards the Vandal monarchy, but no Vandal himself. Pseudo-Origens theology would have also been compatible with an early sixth-century date. His criticisms of the homoousians, such as they are, coincide with the Arian position as stated by Vandal period texts.210 His defence of marriage can be compared to accusations by Nicenes that the Arians were hostile to monasticism, failed to respect vowed virgins, and did not require a celibate clergy.211 It also may explain why the exmonk Fastidiosus could fall into fornication and still become an Arian divine. Pseudo-Origens Pelagian tendencies are a little more surprising, given that North Africa is usually portrayed as the bastion of the doctrine of grace. Yet his emphasis on pure company, irreprehensible bishops, and an immaculate Church smacks of Donatism more than Pelagianism; there is every
and K. Kajanto, Onomastic Studies in the Early Christian Inscriptions of Rome and Carthage (Acta Instituti Romani Finlandiae 2.1) (Helsinki, 1963), p. 98. Mocianus is perhaps a Greek name: compare the late antique Mvkioz in W. Pape and G. E. Benseler, Wo rterbuch der griechischen Eigennamen (Braunschweig, 186370). A few Latin attestations of Mocius are also cited in Perin, Onomasticon, t. 2 (Patavii, 1920), p. 284. Even though people who would otherwise be considered barbarians sometimes had Latinate names, the names they chose tended to be either Christian or reective of some desirable quality (i.e. Lupus)compare the examples of Ostrogothic military men having wives and children with Latinate names as well as Arian clergy with Latinate names in P. Amory, Peoples and Identity in Ostrogothic Italy 489554 (Cambridge, 1997), pp. 979, 271, and 475. 210 For his rejection of the term homoousios (428B), compare Edict. Hunir. apud Vict. Vit. 2.39 (CSEL 7.39) and Victor apud Fulg. Rusp. epist. 9.4 (CC 91.279), Fastid. serm. 2 (CC 91.281), Ps. Aug. coll. c. Pasc 4 (PL 33.1158). The only specic criticism Pseudo-Origen makes is that the homoousians sometimes worship the Father and Son and Holy Spirit as if (they were) three, and never adore them as one/quae Patrem et Filium et Spiritum sanctum aliquando tanquam tres colit, nonnunquam unum adorat (428B). The logic behind this statement seems to be that if all three persons had exactly the same substance and authority, they would be three Gods, not one. If, on the other hand, the Son and Holy Spirit were subordinate to the Father, created by him and doing his will, they could be seen as manifestations of the same Godhead. Compare the Arian interlocutor in Quodv. grat. 1.10.13 (CC 60.450): ille (Arianus) dicit: Trinitas non est unum; the Arian Fabianuss more sophisticated e^orts to prove that the Son and the Spirit were messengers (nuntii, angeli) of the Father (Fulg. Rusp. c. Fab. fr.3.1 and 28.13, CC 91A.767 and 811); and the Arian objections as stated in Ps. Aug. solut. 27 (CC 90.171), qui unius substantiae sunt, non unus deus sed duo dii videntur esse, sicut duo homines aut duae oves pluresve dicuntur, derived from Ambr. d. 5.40 (CSEL 78.231). 211 glise, vol. 4 (Paris, 1937), p. 371. In Vict. P. de Labriolle, et al., Histoire de lE Vit. 1.3031 (CSEL 7.14), a Vandal millenarius forces the vowed virgin Maxima to marry a fellow Roman, Martinian.

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 113 reason to believe that Donatist attitudes survived in Vandal North Africa.212 Moreover, not all African Catholics (much less Arians) had accepted Augustines theology of grace and original sin. It was in Carthage that Caelestius had taught his extreme Pelagian doctrines, to enthusiastic audiences.213 As late as the 520s, Fulgentius of Ruspe was still justifying Augustines theology of grace to doubters in Africa (as well as to the rest of the Mediterranean).214 A Vandal-period poem in the Latin Anthology describes the immaculate soul of a dead child going to heaven in strikingly Pelagian terms.215 Pseudo-Origen may be a rare surviving example of the sort of thinker that theologians like Fulgentius were arguing against. It is still di"cult to explain how an Arian in Vandal North Africa could have learned so much Greek. Among the Nicenes, Greek learning was admired during the Vandal period; indeed one anti-Arian text asserted that the Greeks had a virtual monopoly on theology because it was right that the words of the faith be clearly asserted, not in Africa, or anywhere in Barbaria, but in Syria and Graecia where the divine Flesh itself willed to be born from the virgin.216 Yet even though Greek learning was admired, actual

212 For the survival of Donatist features in the African church until the late sixth century, see R. A. Markus, Gregory the Great and His World (Cambridge, 1997), pp. 18893. 213 Aug. gest. Pelag. 35.62 (CSEL 42.116); Bonner, Runus of Syria, p. 34. 214 The rst book of Fulg. Rusp. Ad Monimum (CC 91.333) is devoted to resolving Monimus doubts about the Augustinian doctrine of predestination. De Trinitate Ad Felicem 9, 10, and 12 (CC 91A.642643, 645) defends the doctrines of original sin; the need for grace to avoid sin; and the sinfulness of all mortals. De incarnatione Filii Dei ad Scarilam 3743 (CC 91.34447) explains how sancti can be said to sin. All of these treatises seem to have been written for men living in North Africa: Monimus was a disciple of Fulgentius, living in Carthage (Ad Monimum prologus [CC 91.2]); Felix was a Catholic notarius who needed theological strengthening because of his constant contact with Arians (trin. 1.1 and the titulus for his o"ce [CC 91A.634]); and Scarila (living during the reign of the proCatholic Hilderic) was perhaps a converted Vandal. Fulgentius wrote a lost treatise against Donatists and Pelagians when in exile in Sardinia: Fulg. Rusp. Contra Fastidiosusm 10 (CC 91.296) (the inclusion of Donatists suggests a North African audience). Fulgentius also wrote a number of works against the semiPelagian theology of Faustus, which had created a furor among Latin-speakers in Constantinople, especially the so-called Scythian monks. 215 Anth. Lat. 81 (R. 92) De christiano infante mortuo, ed. D. R. Shackleton Bailey (Stuttgart, 1982), p. 80, Nobilis atque insons occasu inpubes acerbo / decessit, lacrimas omnibus incutiens. / sed qui regna patent semper caelestia iustis / atque animus caelos inmaculatus adit, / damnantes etus casum laudemus ephebi, / qui sine peccato raptus ad astra viget. The immaculate soul of this child without sin is certain to go to heaven. There is no reference to baptism. 216 Ps. Aug. coll. c. Pasc. (PL 33.1161).

114 LESLIE DOSSEY Greek literacy seems to have declined. Fulgentius the Mythographer quoted Homer and compared Greek and Latin etymologies, but, as Courcelle has persuasively demonstrated, was in fact doing little more than lifting Greek phrases from his LatinGreek glossary.217 Fulgentius of Ruspe, an illustris by birth, had learned Greek as a child, but in all his voluminous writings, he only makes use of the language once.218 The grammarian Priscian, a native of Caesarea, Mauretania before emigrating to Constantinople in the early sixth century, was uent in Greek, and would have been unlikely to get an appointment as an imperial grammarian if he only learned the language after emigration.219 For such grammarians and young men of senatorial status, some training in Greek seems to have been still attainable. Yet the other Vandal-period NicenesQuodvultdeus of Carthage, Victor of Vita, Ferrandus, Dracontius, Pseudo-Fulgentius, the poets responsible for the Latin Anthologyshow little knowledge of Greek.220 We know less about Greek literacy among North African Arians, as we have virtually no surviving Arian texts. Carthage was an international city, with its share of Greek merchants, Egyptian charioteers, and even the occasional Eastern royal o"cial.221 The Arian e lite would have come into contact with Greek speakers; the question is whether they would have learned the language themselves. Members of the Ostrogothic royal family received instruction in Greek as well as Latin.222 Although there is no record of such a practice in the Vandal court, it should be remembered that one of these educated Ostrogothic princesses, Amalafrida, became the Vandal queen in 500 (reigning until 523).
Courcelle, Late Latin writers, pp. 2223. Vita Fulg. Rusp. 1.45 (PL 65.119) discusses Fulgentius childhood training in Greek. 219 R. H. Robins, Priscian, Oxford Classical Dictionary, ed. S. Hornblower and A. Spawforth (Oxford, 19963), 12478. A similar case is Speciosus, a North African rhetorician who got an appointment in Constantinople in 532: see R. Kaster, Guardians of Language: The Grammarian and Society in Late Antiquity (Berkeley, 1988), p. 360, n. 139. 220 Dracontius is a possible exception: see A. Isola, I Cristiani dellAfrica Vandalica nei Sermones del tempo (429534) (Milan, 1990), p. 119. 221 See F. M. Clover, Carthage and the Vandals, Excavations at Carthage 1978 conducted by the University of Michigan, ed. J. H. Humphreys, vol. 7 (Ann Arbor, 1982), pp. 1112. 222 See Moorhead, Theoderic in Italy, pp. 878, for the education of Theoderics family. His daughter, Amalasuintha, was said to know Greek, Latin, and Gothic. His nephew, Theodahad, was learned in the Platonic philosophers. One of his sisters (possibly Amalafrida) was sent to Constantinople in 487 to be a companion of the empress Ariadne.
218 217

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 115 There was a certain amount of contact between North African Arians and the Arians of the East. In 455, the Eastern court used an Arian bishop (Bleda) from Constantinople as an envoy to the Vandals.223 In the 480s, Huneric demanded that the emperor Zeno allow freedom of religion to the Arian bishops in Constantinople and other regions of the East, a demand that suggests continued communication with them.224 By the late Vandal period, North African Arians appear to have established a presence on the Eastern pilgrimage route: a Latin pilgrimage account written around AD 530 mentions a monastery of the religion of the Vandals in Memphis, Egypt.225 Pseudo-Origen may have gained his knowledge of Greek as a pilgrim, court scholasticus, or diplomat (or he may indeed have been an Eastern Arian, who immigrated to Africa in search of a friendlier political clime). However it came about, it seems that at least one other Arian in Vandal Africa knew Greek. The only time Fulgentius of Ruspe considered it necessary to quote Greek was when writing against the Arian Fabianus. At some point between 523 and 533, Fabianus and Fulgentius had engaged in a public debate, most likely in Carthage.226 Fabianus published the proceedings in a manner so unattering to his opponent that Fulgentius composed the tenvolume Contra Fabianum in response. In the Contra Fabianum, Fulgentius quoted Scriptures in Greek as well as Latin, a practice not followed in his other works.227 He did so with the expectation that Fabianus would be able to follow the Greek, saying at one point that I will bring forward the truth of the Greek reading in this place also, so that you might understand this (point) more fully.228 Fabianus also apparently prided himself on his Latin: Fulgentius quotes Virgil to him and chides him by saying, I think
223 Priscus fr.31, ed. Blockley, p. 333 (AD 455). Bleda was probably one of the eastern Gothic bishops: see Mathisen, Barbarian Bishops, p. 676. 224 Edict. Hunir. apud Vict. Vit 2.4 (CSEL 7.25), demanding toleration for nostrae religionis episcopi, qui in Constantinopolim sunt et per alias prouincias Orientis. 225 Theodosius, De situ terrae sanctae 14 (CSEL 38.144): In Aegypto civitas Memphis, ubi Pharao manebat, ubi et Ioseph in carcere missus fuerat; ibi sunt monasteria duo, unum est religionis Wandalorum et aliud Romanorum, hoc est Wandalorum sancti Hieremiae, Romanorum sancti Apolloni heremitae. For the similar use of ecclesia Gothica to designate the whole Arian church in Ostrogothic Italy, see Amory, Peoples and Identity in Ostrogothic Italy, pp. 25961, although, in this case, the Arian clerics voluntarily chose this designation. 226 Fulg. Rusp. c. Fab. fr. (CC 91A.763866). For dating, see Fabianus, PCBE 1, 380 (although there is a typo in the date). 227 Scriptures in Greek occur in Fulg. Rusp. c. Fab., CC 91A.765, 766, 770, 771, 782, 783, 786. 228 Fulg. Rusp. c. Fab. fr.3.11 (CC 91A.770): Quod ut manifestius noueris, ueritatem tibi etiam in hoc loco Graecae ingeram lectionis.

116 LESLIE DOSSEY that a man like you who claims to be skilled in latinitas might know that subministrare is not the same thing as ministrare.229 Fabianus is the best counterpart for the real Pseudo-Origenan Arian scholar of late Vandal North Africa, literate in Latin and Greek, involved in debating the Greek Scriptures with his Nicene opponents. So this era of the 520s and 530s is when I would put PseudoOrigen. By this time, the Arian church in North Africa had grown beyond the Vandals to include some Romans who had been Arian for more than one generation. Arian scholars were able to debate the likes of Fulgentius of Ruspe on something like an equal footing. Pseudo-Origen might be the one survivor of a tradition of North African Arians who could counter Jeromes translations with their own corrected Bible, and Nicene theology with their own Arian Greek texts. Pseudo-Origen and the late Vandal e lite The 520s were also a time when the Vandal kingdom descended into a period of civil wars and coups that would eventually lead to the Byzantine reconquest. In these last pages, I would like to explore how Pseudo-Origen would change or conrm our images of the Arian e litea group virtually lost to historyin the nal decades of Vandal rule. The impression he gives of his audience is, above all, one of wealth. They possess its usual trappingsdomestic servants, clients, landed estates.230 He would like them to be content solely with their estates, but realizes that in these last times men are fated to pant after dead gold and silver (386A). Some of this panting after gold may be in the form of mercantile activity (or piracy): references to the sea are common in the text, including a description of what it means to wait for ones sons to return from sea voyages to other provinces.231 His audience also appears to be familiar with the prots of government service, lawsuits,
229 Fulg. Rusp. c. Fab. fr.3.10 (CC 91A.770): puto quod homo, qui te latinitatis peritum esse commemoras, prorsus noueris non hoc esse subministrare, quod est ministrare. He quotes Virgil in c. Fab. 34.9 (CC 91A.839). 230 He assumes that they have servants and clients: celebrent diem festum nostrum servi nostri et ancillae, et clientes nostri, et egeni, et pauperes universi (393D); that the women in his audience will become mistresses possessing potestatem _ laborum alienorum (383D); that they will be familiar with agricultural estates (388A), and with coloni (420D). 231 Ps. Orig. 480C: neque in navibus navigantes ad exteras provincias transierunt, ut denuo ad tempus remeantes suscipere, atque videre eos possis. For Pseudo-Origens other references to the sea, see 460C, on how sailors will throw cargo into sea when in danger; 431A on overturning ships; 488D, 425D, 453A, and 496B for briefer references to the sea.

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 117 and raids.232 As for their lifestyle, they indulge in too much in food and drink (especially drink).233 Horses are a necessity to them, both for transport and warfare.234 They are given to fancy burials, involving elaborate tombs and at least some grave goods.235 A major reason for mourning the death of sons was that they would not be around to bury their parents honourably (480B, 481B). As for their physical spaces, they seem to inhabit a world of that is urban but fundamentally private: PseudoOrigen mentions cities, villages, streets, and houses with porticoes (498A, 502B)but is notably silent about civic spaces. Some of these details echo what we hear in other Vandal period sources; others do not. Fulgentius the Mythographer complained about living in a time when, nothing else matters but the business of making a nummus, and the perpetual concern for acquiring prot festers daily in peoples minds.236 Procopius notes the luxury of the Vandal lifestyle, with special mention of their banquets and love of gold.237 Vandal Carthage was full of men who made their living from the sea, some of whom were Arians, since Fulgentius of Ruspe complained that the Vandal king had taken away the ship commands from Catholics and given them to Arians.238 Horses were a mainstay of Vandal
232 Note Ps. Orig. 379C for bribes from being a judge; 392A for litigation; 476CD for raids. 233 He notes this in his comments on Jobs childrens feasting: Ps. Orig. 394B. 234 Ps. Orig. 385C for horses now being used for light transport; 425C for how warfare used to be carried out by large armies of infantry, not cavalry. 235 For the tombs, note the comment that men have been accustomed to break precious tombs to prevent theft: Ps. Orig. 436B, Puto quod ex illo consueverunt homines, cum pretiosam sepulturam cuilibet miserint, conscindunt eam, ne aliqui scelesti et ipsum corpus projiciant, et ipsam pretiosam sepulturam possideant. The logic behind this was perhaps that a damaged sarcophagus would not be useful for some common reuses: compare a poem by Luxorius (523530) about a sarcophagus reused as a fountain for the circus horses to drink out of: Anth. Lat. 315 (R. 320), ed. Bailey, pp. 2556. As for allusions to grave goods (especially clothing), PseudoOrigen has to remind his audience on more than one occasion that what gets buried with body is not revived with the resurrection: 441A, 479A. Job ripped his precious and royal garments so that when he died the devil wouldnt possess them after his burial (436A). 236 Fulg. Myth. De aetatibus Mundi et Hominis praef., ed. R. Helm (Lipsiae, 1898), p. 129: ubi nihil plus nisi de nummi quaestu res uertitur et conquirendi lucri perennis sollicitudo cotidie mentibus suppuretur. 237 Procopius, De bello Vandalico 2.6.67, ed. Haury, p. 444. 238 For Eastern merchants at Carthage, see Procopius, De bello Vandalico 1.20.5, ed. Haury, p. 397, and Clover, Carthage and the Vandals, p. 11. For ship commands being transferred to Arians, see Fulg. Rusp. Abecedarium 2478 (CC 91A.884): Naucleriis tollunt naves qui illas solent gubernare / et perditis illas tradunt per quos possint naufragare.

118 LESLIE DOSSEY warfare.239 Pseudo-Origens emphasis on burials calls to mind the last Vandal king, Geilimer, who lost a key battle to Belisarius because he took the time to give his brother an honourable burial.240 But absent from Pseudo-Origen are the hunts, public baths, and chariot races mentioned by the Latin Anthology and other Vandal-period sources.241 Pseudo-Origen is not interested in condemning the luxury of his audiences lifestyle so much as containing their power struggles against one another. When commenting on the fact that Jobs sons dined together, he sets up the unanimity of these brothers as a model for present-day brothersboth brothers in the faith (religiosos fratres), and blood brothers (veros germanos). Brothers should not compete for elegance, struggle for power, or be in confusion for the sake of a kingdom.242 Among Jobs children, the eldest son did not scorn the youngest. In return, the youngest yielded obedience and primacy to the eldest.243 They didnt need to have judgements made among them, but rather considered all their property to be held common.244 Job helped prevent such strife by giving equal shares of the inheritance to all.245 The implication is that in Pseudo-Origens own time, brothers were litigating for a greater share of an inheritance, struggling for the sake of

Courtois, Les Vandales et lAfrique, p. 231. Procopius, De bello Vandalico 1.19.29, ed. Haury, p. 395. Procopius clearly considered Geilimers family piety an act of stupidity. 241 For praise o^ public baths built by Thrasamund (thermi Alianarum): see Anth. Lat. 2014 (R. 21013), and for more general poems on baths, Anth. Lat. 113 (R. 124), 108 (R. 124) and 372 (R. 377). Chariot races and the games of the amphitheatre (esp. hunts) are discussed in Anth. Lat. 3223 (R. 3278), 331 (R. 336), 348349 (R. 35354), and 368 (R. 373). Procopius, De bello Vandalico 2.6, ed. Haury, p. 444, mentions the Vandals enjoying theatres, hippodromes, and bathing. Referencees to the amphitheatre, theatre, and circus are also found in Vandal-period sermons (especially Quodvultdeus): see Isola, I Cristiani dellAfrica Vandalica, pp. 1329. 242 Ps. Orig. 384C: Non sit inter germanos lis, sed benignitas atque concordia; 384D: Non certaverunt pro elegantia, non litigaverunt pro fortitudine, non contenderunt pro divitiis, non sunt conturbati pro regno, sed cum essent unanimes, cuncta propria invicem sibi aestimabant communia. 243 Ps. Orig. 391D: Non contemnebat primus novissimum _ Junior majori obsequium reddebat, novissimus primo cum primatu honorem exhibebat; non invidebat alter alteri. 244 Ps. Orig. 392A: Nullus judicabat inter eos, nec quidquam suum esse dicebat sed erant illis omnia communia, et munera, et substantia, et divitiae, et unanimitas, et pecunia, et charitas, omnia erant illis communia. 245 Ps. Orig. 395D: Si haereditatem, inquit, illis distribuerem, si dona illis ingentia donarem, nonne secundum numerum illorum dividerem? Nonne secundum personas eorum dare?
240

239

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 119 a kingdom, and perhaps encountering some di"culties combining Roman and barbarian inheritance practices. The competitiveness of these brothers and their factions (sodales) has apparently led them to the brink of civil war. Former allies are now made enemies, for no good reason.246 Men who should have stood together and defended each others backs in battle, now rejoice in each others ruin.247 For this state of a^airs, Pseudo-Origen blames their wives. Wives marry into a property that they did not earn, and push their husbands into litigation or worse, saying to them: you come from a journey, and you enter the house with empty hands. Others go and when they return bring something _ But you are worse than the others, weaker than other men, more useless than all.248 They incite their husbands to greed, rapine, calumny, violence, even raids against one another, these women whose concern is not how their husbands acquire, as much from pillage as even plunder, as much from violence as theft, so long as they, heaping it into one pile, carry it to them.249 This vivid picture of e lite factionalism is more reminiscent of Gregory of Tours than of the Vandal-period sources (though Procopius does mention greedy Vandal wives).250 Part of the cause of this atmosphere of conict may be the turbulent politics of the late Vandal kingdom. The Vandal kingdom, with its plethora of royal sons, had always been plagued

246 Ps. Orig. 500C: Frequenter namque etiam nunc idem ipse diabolus unanimes sodales commiscet atque conturbat per quamlibet modicam rationem, et ad immensam inimicitiam adversus invicem immutatu, it ut eciantur sibi ex amicis inimici, ex sinceris crudeles adversarii. 247 Ps. Orig. 496A: et quod est maximum cum debuerant unanimiter pro invicem adversus inimicos suos atque adversarios stare, sive intus, sive foris, sive in bello, sive in praeliis, et sibi invicem intendere atque invicem adjuvare, et mutuo amore terga defendere, reperiuntur sibi invicem inimici ac proditores, atque in propriis ruinis gaudentes. 248 Ps. Orig. 476C: frequenter dicit ad viros per os conjugum: Existi foras, et nihil intro attulisti. De via venisti, et vacuis manibus domum introisti. Alii eunt, et reversi aerunt: alii prociscuntur et venientes perducuntur. Tu vero deterior caeteris, tu autem debilior viris, inutilior cunctis. 249 Ps. Orig. 476CD: quibus curae non est unde acquirant viri tam ex rapinis quam etiam ex praedis, tam ex violentiis quam ex furtis, tantum ut in unum coacervantes illis aerant. 250 Procopius writes how the Vandal wives after the Justinianic conquest pushed their new husbands (the Byzantine soldiers) into rebellion, asserting that it wasnt right for them to have possessed more property when married to Vandals than when married to the conquerors of the Vandals: Procopius, De bello Vandalico 2.14.9, ed. Haury, p. 483.

120 LESLIE DOSSEY by succession crises.251 These tensions got worse after Hilderic became king in 523. Hilderic, the son of a Vandal king and a Roman princess, restored the Nicene bishops to their sees, allowed Nicenes in his court, and entered into alliance with the Byzantines.252 The opposition against him was rst led by the deposed queen, Amalafrida, who took refuge with the Moors, until she was captured and eliminated in prison.253 Less than ve years later, a faction of Vandal nobles overthrew Hilderic (AD 530). Geilimer, a pious Arian and great-grandson of Geiseric, became king. He carried out his own purge of Hilderics supporters, providing the justication for Justinians invasion in 533.254 Pseudo-Origens commentary might be placed during this last decade of Vandal rule. His virulent opposition to rulers having indels as their advisers may have been a reaction against Hilderics pro-Catholic policy.255 Pseudo-Origen furthermore disapproved of the sort of inter-ethnic marriage that produced Hilderic. He emphasized that Jobs wife, though from a di^erent principality, was nevertheless a fellow Arab: Job would never have permitted himself to take a wife from a foreign race.256 It is even possible that Pseudo-Origens lengthy and rather sympathetic portrait of Jobs wife, a woman born in a royal palace reduced to wandering beggary, evoked Amalafrida, who had been reduced to wandering and begging mercy from the Moors.257
251 See S. L. Schmidt, Geschichte der Wandalen (Munich, 1942), p. 105, for the conict over the succession after Geiserics death. 252 For Hilderics pro-Nicene policy and alliance with Constantinople, see Courtois, Les Vandales et lAfrique, pp. 3049; and H.-J. Diesner, Die Auswirkungen der Religionspolitik Thrasamunds und Hilderichs auf Ostgoten und Byzantiner (Sitzungsberichte der Sa chsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig. Phil.-hist. Klasse B. 113.3) (Berlin, 1967), pp. 212. Hilderic was the son of Huneric and Eudocia (the daughter of Valentinian III), who had been captured by Geiseric in 455 AD. 253 For Amalfridas death in 525/26 and the resulting diplomatic break with Ostrogothic Italy, see Moorhead, Theoderic in Italy, pp. 2478. 254 Schmidt, Geschichte der Wandalen, pp. 1204. 255 This opposition is displayed both in his refusal to admit that a just prince like God would have had an audience with the devil (Ps. Orig. 406A: see n. 105), and in his assertion that Jobs friends must have been just and pious men, because Job wouldnt have had impii as his allies: Ps. Orig. 497A, Nam illi viri Dei cultores fuerunt, utpote Job sodales atque amici, pii ac Deo credentes. Non enim amplexabatur Job justus, injustos vel impios viros amicos ac sodales habere. 256 Ps. Orig. 505AB: Nam et uxorem de Arabia accepit, utpote ejusdem generis exsistentibus Arabitis. Nisi enim unius generis essent, nunquam Job ex alienigena gente uxorem se accipere passus fuisset. 257 Ps. Orig. 479A486A. As far as I can tell, Pseudo-Origen is the only extant exegete to make Jobs wife of royal birth (483A: Nam intra palatia nutrita, et in regno vivens, et in principatu atque opulentia degens, omnium foris eram ignara).

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA 121 Under this interpretation, Pseudo-Origen becomes the spokesman for the Arian opposition to Hilderic, in particular for those holy, righteous, and perfect africani who had become Arians, worked hard, and got rich under Vandal kings (to whom they had been deserving friends, both to them and their fathers). These were men with enough culture to be proud of a preacher who could rival any Nicene in learning. Yet they could appreciate his rather worldly theology, according to which God only orders humans to do what they are capable of doing, and married, wealthy, governmental types have a shot at being perfect. They had been able to identify with the dux Job, with his great estates, law tribunal, and numerous familia. Now faced with a pro-homoousian king, they needed to learn to emulate Job on his dung heap:

If you who ought to have been honorable and rich because of the goodness and wealth of your parents, have been made dishonorable and needy, do not despair, because this above-said man Job was also rolled o^ a royal and glorious seat into a dung heap. (375B)

By narrating Jobs endurance under hardship, Pseudo-Origen was hoping to inspire them to stand together, refuse to associate with the homoousians, and wait for their restoration to power. SUMMARY The goal of this article has been to give the Commentarius in Iob a provenanceand to suggest some reasons why scholars might care that it have one. I have approached the text from three di^erent directions, rst by examining its exegetical sources; secondly, its translation of Job; and, nally, the clues the author gives about his historical context. Pseudo-Origens exegetical tradition would seem to link him to the East. He was borrowing from Greek exegesis on Job, most clearly the Job sermons of Pseudo-Chrysostom. He also had important, though less direct, parallels with Julian the Arian and John Chrysostom. Moreover, his translation of Job contains variants only otherwise found in the Greek Septuagint. These characteristics indicate that he was either a Greek author in Latin translation or a Latin author using Greek sources. I argue for the latter. Although he depended on the Greeks for his literal exegesis, his moral and theological interpretations connect him more with the West. He was relatively indi^erent towards the christological controversies that absorbed the fth and sixth-century East. The theological issues that most

122 LESLIE DOSSEY concerned him were the need for pure company and the ability of humans to avoid sin through their own free will. These emphases associate him with Western heresies, Donatism and Pelagianism. His scriptural tradition of Job, though revised to reect the Greek, does not follow the pattern of translator. When he quotes Scriptures initially, he does indeed give a literal translation of the Septuagint. However, in his discussion, especially when quoting from memory, he demonstrates a familiarity with variants only found in the Old Latin. I conclude that he was a Latin author making extensive use of Greek. The rest of the article was devoted to determining in which part of the Latin world he would have most likely lived. The main reason for locating him in North Africa is his scriptural tradition. A statistical comparison between his scriptural variants and those of other Latin authors shows that his translation of Job strongly resembles the recension used by North African (especially Donatist) authors. The reasons for dating him to the late Vandal period are more complex, having to do with the assumptions he makes about the status of his audience, the length of time they have been Arian, and their political environment. I propose that the commentary was the work of an Arian cleric or scholasticus, writing in North Africa in the 520s, for e lite circles currently out of favour with the pro-Catholic Hilderic. If I am correct, the implications would be wide-ranging. A scholarly Arian in Vandal Africa, literate in Greek as well as Latin, would underscore the degree of fusion between Roman and barbarian in the post-Roman West. It would make us rethink the intellectual pretensions of the post-Roman Arian church, at least in North Africa. And, most importantly, the commentary would provide a window into the social history of an era for which we have little other evidence, illuminating everything from attitudes towards marriage, to inheritance strategies, to the continued use of curse tablets. More work, however, is needed to make this proposed provenance anything more than a hypothesis. It would be desirable to study the rest of Pseudo-Origens Bible (and a critical edition of the text would be helpful, indeed, necessary for this). I have found scriptural and textual links between Pseudo-Origen and several other anonymous texts, which may come from the same milieu, one of them possibly by the same author.258 Additional research on thesein particular, on their manuscript
258 I am engaged in research on the possibility that Pseudo-Chrysostom, De consolatione mortis sermones 2 (PG 40.11591168) is by the same author.

123 THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA traditionmay provide more denite evidence for provenance. I nevertheless hope that this article, speculative as it is, communicates why this complex, arrogant, and original author is worthy of further attention. LESLIE DOSSEY APPENDIX: SIGNIFICANT VARIANTS IN P S E U D O -O R I G E N S O L D L A T I N J O B 259
1:1 cui nomen~AM ex 1.7.25 (CSEL 32.1.23) nomine: AU perf 12.29 (CSEL 42.29); HI q (CC 72.35), etc. (2); LJ, VG 1:1 sine querela, iustus, verax dei cultor (order) [alt. *justus et verax et sine querela (375A)] justus rst: CLE-R 17, ed. G. Morin, Anecdota Maredsolana 2, 18; HI ep 122.3.14 (CSEL 56.68); QU pro 1.22.30 (CC 60.38); ZE 1.15.2 (CC 22.60, P) verus rst: AU perf 12.29 (CSEL 42.29); Max. ap. AU Max co (PL 42.729); CY op 18 (CC 3A.67); HI Pel 1.12 (CC 80.14), etc. (2); LJ 1:1 sine querela~CLE-R 17; GAU praef 35 (CSEL 68.9); HI ep 122.3.14; QU pro 1.22.30 sine crimine: AU perf 12.29; HI Pel 1.12; LJ inmaculatus: HI ep 121.8.18 (CSEL 56.35), etc. (2) simplex: VG om.: CY op 18; Max. ap. AU Max co; ZE 1.15.2 iustus~AU perf 12.29; Max. ap. AU Max co; CLE-R 17; CY op 18; HI ep 121.8.18, etc. (2); QU pro 1.22.30; LJ rectus: Apponius, 19.23); VG Cant 1.34 (CC

om.: GAU praef 35; HI Pel 1.12 (CC 80.14) 1:1/1:8/2:3 verax dei cultor ~AU Ps 103.4.8 (CC 40.1528); PS-BAS cons 4 (PG 31.1692C); HI ep 118.3 (CSEL 55.437); ORO ap. 21.4 (CSEL 5.637); LJ

259 The text in bold is Pseudo-Origens Job. I have only included those variants for which there are other Old Latin witnesses. The abbreviations follow H. Frede, Kirchenschriftsteller: Verzeichnis und Sigel (Vetus Latina 1/1) (Freiburg: 1995), with the following exceptions: Cass~Cassian; Gloss~J. Ziegler, Randnoten aus der Vetus Latina des Buches Iob in spanischen Vulgatabibeln (Sitzungsberichte. Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Jr. 1980, H. 2) (Munich: 1980); LJ (Liber Job)~C. P. Caspari, ed., Das Buch Hiob in Hieronymuss Uebersetzung aus der alexandrinischen Version nach einer St. Gallener Handschrift saec. VIII, Christiania Videnskabs-Selskabs Forhandlinger (Oslo: 1893); VG~Biblia Sacra iuxta Latinam Vulgatam versionem, t. 9 Hester-Iob (Rome: 1951), pp. 95207. P is for paraphrase. In the interest of space, I have only listed one reference per author per variant, putting in parentheses how many attestations I found in total. When Pseudo-Origen gives more than one reading, I have tried to determine which was his dominant reading, listing the others as alt. Where I considered the alternative readings to be his original Bible (i.e. before modication according to the Greek), I marked them with *. I only included those alternative readings in the statistical count that are both starred and marked in bold.

124 LESLIE DOSSEY *verus dei cultor: AMst q 118.4 (CSEL oves numero septem milia: PS-BAS 50.356); AU s sy 3.10 (CC 46.192) etc. cons 4 (2); Cael. ap. AU perf 16.37 (CSEL cameli tria milia~PS-BAS cons 4; 42.38); Petil. ap. AU Pet 2.49.113 HI Ez h 4.8; LJ (CSEL 52.86); CY mort 10 (CC 3A.21); PS-FU s 71 (PL 65.943D); tria milia camelorum: VG GAU praef 35; PS-MAX ep 1 (PL 57.932B); PEL Dem 6 (PL iuga boum quingenta~PS-BAS 30.22D), cf. verum suum cultorem cons 4; HI Ez h 4.8; LJ LUC reg 11 (CC 8.159, P) quingenta _ iuga boum: VG verax/verus _ dei cultor: AU perf asinae pastoriae quingentae 12.29; MAX ap. AU Max co (PL 42.729); HI ep 121.8.18 asinae gregales quingentae: LJ, cf. asini feminae gregales quingentae: PS-BAS verax timens et colens eum: CLE-R 17 cons 4 timens deum: VG quingentae asinae: VG 1:1 ab omni re mala~Cael. ap. AU ministerium nimis copiosum perf 12.29 (CSEL 42.29); AU nat 62.72 (CSEL 60.288, P); HI Pel 1.12 *ministerium copiosum nimis: Gloss, (CC 80.14); LJ 11; LJ *ab omni mala re: CLE-R 17 ministerium multum nimis: PS-BAS cons 4 *ab omni re maligna: Hilary ap. AU nat 62.72 (CSEL 60.287, P) suppellex multa valde: HI Ez h 4.8 ab omni opere malo: HI ep 121.8.18 familia multa nimis: VG ab omni malo: Apponius Cant 1.34; HI illius ep 121.8.19 ei: LJ a malo: VG illi: Gloss, 11 om.: CY op 18; MAX ap. AU Max co (PL 42.729); GAU praef 35 (CSEL in terris 68.9); QU pro 1.22.30; ZE 1.15.2 super terram: Gloss, 11 1:2 liae tres~PS-BAS cons 4 (PG de genere optimo [alt. *magnus, 31.1693A); HI Ez h 4.8 (SC 352.186) admirabilis 379A cf. 391A] lias tres: LJ ingenuus: Gloss, 11 tres liae: VG nobilis: LJ, cf. PS-FU s 71 (PL 1:3 erant pecora eius~PS-BAS cons 65.943C, P) 4 (PG 31.1693A); LJ felix: Fulg. Myth. De aet. 4, ed. fuit possessio eius: VG Helm, 142
ovium septem millia *septem milia ovium: VG oves septem milia: HI Ez h 4.8 (SC 352.186); LJ *potens et magnus: MAX ap. AU Max co (PL 42.729) *magnus: VG ex partibus orientis

125 THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA *inter omnes ex parte orientis: MAX victimas: LJ ap. AU Max co (PL 42.729) sacricium: AM sa 5.4.25 ad solis ortum: Gloss, 11 sacricia: CHRO Mt 32.8; PS-BAS de liis Orientis: LJ cons 4; Cass co 6.10; VER cant Az. 8
orientalium: PS-FU s 71 (PL 65.943C) inter omnes Orientales: VG 1:4 potationes convivium: LJ; VG conviviis: VER cant Az. 8 (CC 93.90, P) per singulos dies~CHRO Mt 32.208 (CC 9A.356, P) quotidie: AM sa 5.4.25 (CSEL 73.69); HI Ez 14.46.1924 (CC 75.703, P), etc. (2); LJ 1:5 mundebat*PS-BAS cons 4 (PG 31.1692D, P) *emundabat: CY op 18 (CC 3A.67) puricabat: LJ; cf. pro eorum puricatione Cass co 6.10 (CSEL 13.164, P) purgaret: CHRO Mt 32.8 (CC 9A.356, P) sancticabat: VG oerens ~ CY op 18 oerebat: AM sa 5.4.25 (CSEL 73.69, P); CHRO Mt 32.8; HI Ez 14.46.19 24 (CC 75.703, P); Gloss, 11; ZE 1.15.2 (CC 22.60, P); LJ; VG obtulerit: HI Am 2.5.18/20 (CC 76.292, P) oerret: PS-BAS cons 4 (PG 31.1692C, P), cf. oert HI Pel 1.34 (CC 80.42) immolabat: VER cant Az. 8 (CC 93.90, P), cf. immolarit HI ep 73.2 (CSEL 56.15, P) deferebat: Cass co 6.10 (CSEL 13.164, P) hostiam~HI Ez 14.46.1924 hostias: CHRO Mt 32.8; CY op 18; HI Pel 1.34, etc. (3); Gloss, 11; ZE 1.15.2 holocausta: VG pro peccatis~CY op 18; Gloss, 11 pro peccato: LJ animarum illorum~Gloss, 11 animarum ipsorum: LJ eorum: CY op 18 (illorum V P h) mali aliquid *aliquid _ malitiae: PS-BAS cons 4 aliquid: AM sa 5.4.25 mala: Gloss, 11 quid _ perversum: HI Am 2.5.18/20, cf. quid delictum VER cant Az. 8 om.: LJ in corde suo~PS-BAS cons 4 *in corde: AM sa 5.4.25 in praecordiis suis: Gloss, 11 in cordibus suis: LJ; VG per ignorantiam in cogitatione: HI Pel 1.34; cf. per ignorantiam HI Ez 14.46.1924 cogitaverint~Gloss, 11 *cogitarent: PS-BAS cons 4; HI Am 2.5.18/20; peccassent: AM sa 5.4.25 peccaverint: HI Pel 1.34; LJ; VG deliquissent: HI Ez 14.46.1924 1:6 ante deum in conspectum dei: AU s 12.1 (CC 41.165), etc. (2); cf. HI Ez 4.14.1/11 (CC 75.151, P, in conspectu dei ) coram deo: LJ; cf. coram Domino VG

126

LESLIE DOSSEY 1:7/2:2 ad diabolum~AN h Esc 14, 1:8/2:3 puerum~AMst q 118.4; AN Rech. Aug. 31 (1999), 171 h Esc 14, 171 and 172; AU s sy 3.10, etc. (3); PS-BAS cons 4; CY te 3.14; diabolo: AU s 12.1 (CC 41.165); CY mort 10; PS-FU s 71; PS-MAX PS-BAS cons 4 (PG 31.1692C); LJ ep 1 (PL 57.932B); ORO ap 20.4; PEL Dem 6 (PL 30.22C); QU pro venis~AU s 12.1; VG 1.22.30; LJ ades: ORO ap. 20.1 (CSEL 5.634); LJ servum: Cael. ap. AU perf 16.37; VG circuivi~CHRO Mt 41.74 (CC famulum: HI ep 118.3.1 (CSEL 55.437) 9A.392); HI Jr 1.72 (CC 59.54); VG circuiens: AU s 12.1 (var. circumivi A4) 1:8/2:3 quia~AU Pet 2.49.113; PSBAS cons 4; HI ep 118.3.1; PS-MAX ep 1; ORO ap. 20.4; LJ enim: AMst q 118.4; AU s sy 3.10; etc. (2); Cael. ap. AU perf 16.37 (CSEL 42.38); CY te 3.14; CY mort 10; PEL Dem 6; QU pro 1.22.30 quoniam: PS-FU s 71 quod: VG 1:8/2:3 in terris~AMst q 118.4; AN h Esc 14, 172; AU s sy 3.10; Cael. ap. AU perf 16.37 (CSEL 42.38); PS-BAS cons 4; CY te 3.14; CY mort 10; PSFU s 71; PS-MAX ep 1; PEL Dem 6; QU pro 1.22.30 in terra: AU Pet 2.49.113; VG super terram: AU pec 2.12.17; HI ep 118.3; JO-N 18 (PLS 4.789); ORO ap. 20.4; LJ 1:8/2:3 sine querela~AN h Esc 14; AU s sy 3.10, etc. (3); Cael. ap. AU perf 16.37; CY te 3.14; CY mort 10; PS-FU s 71; HI Pel 2.4; LEO s 27.5 (CC 138.136); LUC reg 11 (CC 8.159, P); PS-MAX ep 1; PEL Dem 6 sine crimine: PS-BAS cons 4; HI Pel 1.12; ORO ap. 21.4; LJ sine malitia: Petil. ap. AU Pet 2.49.113

circumiens: ORO ap 20.1; HI Ez 4.14.1/ 11 (CC 75.151, P); LJ totam~totum: AU s 12.1 universum: CHRO Mt 41.74 omnem: HI Jr 1.72 om.: ORO ap 20.1; HI Ez 4.14.1/11; LJ; VG terram~ORO ap 20.1; HI Jr 1.72, etc. (2); LJ; VG orbem: AU s 12.1 mundum: CHRO Mt 41.74 1:8 animadvertisti~AMst q 118.4 (CSEL 50.356); AN h Esc 14, 171; AU s sy 3.10 (CC 46.192), etc. (2); CY mort 10 (CC 3A.21); CY te 3.14 (CC 3.105); PS-FU s 71 (PL 65.943D); ORO ap 20.4 (CSEL 5.635); QU pro 1.22.30 (CC 60.38); LJ considerasti: Cael. ap. AU perf 16.37 (CSEL 42.38); VG; cf. considerasti sensu tuo PS-BAS cons 4 (PG 31.1692C) ad~AMst q 118.4; AN h Esc 14; AU s sy 3.10; var CY mort 10 (ms. V R h); var CY te 3.14 (MS V R recension africaine); QU pro 1.22.30 om.: CY te 3.14; CY mort 10; Cael. ap. AU perf 16.37; PS-BAS cons 4; VG adversus: PS-FU s 71 in: AU pec 2.12.17; ORO ap 20.4; AN h Esc 14; LJ

inmaculatus: HI Pel 2.4 simplex: VG 1:8/2:3 iustus~AU pec 2.12.17; HI Pel 2.4

127 THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA om.: AN h Esc 14; AU s sy 3.10, etc. omnia quae foris sunt et quae intus sunt (2); Petil. ap. AU Pet 2.49.113; Cael. eius: RUF pri 3.2.6 ap. AU perf 16.37; PS-BAS cons 4; domum eius, universamque substantiam CY te 3.14; CY mort 10; PS-FU s 71; eius: AU Ps 29.2.7; Cass co 4.6.2; VG PEL Dem 6; LEO s 27.5; ORO ap. 21.4; LJ multiplicasti~QU pro 1.22.30 (CC 60.38), *multiplicas AN h Esc 14, 172 rectus: VG
1:8/2:3 abstinens~AU pec 2.12.17; Cael. ap. AU perf 16.37; Petil. ap. AU Pet 2.49.113; CY te 3.14; HI ep 118.3, etc. (2); PS-MAX ep 1; ORO ap 21.4; PEL Dem 6; LJ continens: LEO I s 27.5 recedens: VG 1:8 ab omni re mala~LEO I s 27.5 ab omni opere malo: AU pec 2.12.17 ab omni malo: CY te 3.14; Cael. ap. AU perf 16.37 (CSEL 42.38); HI Pel 2.4 (CC 80.59, P); ORO ap 21.4 (CSEL 5.637); LJ a malo: VG 1:9 sine causa gratis: AM 118 Ps 20.43 (CSEL 62.466), etc. (2); AU Ps 29.2.7 (CC 38.179), etc. (4); CAE s 21.5 (CC 103.96); Cass co 4.6.2 (CSEL 13.101); QU pro 1.22.30 (CC 60.38); LJ frustra: VG 1:10 munisti *communisti: RUF pri 3.2.6 (CB 22.255) circumsepisti: ORO ap 20.5 (CSEL 5.635); LJ vallasti eum: AM 118 Ps 20.43 (CSEL 62.466); AU Ps 29.2.7 (CC 38.179); Cass co 4.6.2 (CSEL 13.101); VG ea quae extra domum atque intra domum eius sunt *quae sunt extra domum et intra domum eius: ORO ap. 20.5; LJ multa fecisti: LJ crevit: AU Ps 29.2.7; VG 1:11 mitte ~ AM 118 Ps 20.43 (CSEL 62.466), etc. (4); AU Ps 29.2.7 (CC 38.179), etc. (3); QU pro 1.22.30 (CC 60.38); HI Ez 5.16.27 (CC 75.190), etc. (2); LJ *immitte: RUF pri 3.2.6 (CB 22.255) aufer: Cass co 13.14.1 (CSEL 13.385) extende: VG tange~AM Ps 37.21, etc. (2); AU Ps 29.2.7, etc. (3); HI Ez 5.16.27, etc. (2); QU pro 1.22.30; LJ; VG continge: RUF pri 3.2.6 tolle: AU Ps 72.30 et scito 1/3 (alt. *om.) *et scies: QU pro 1.22.30 et vide: AU Ps 120.11 videamus: AM Ps 37.21 etc. (2) ~om. AM 118 Ps 20.43; AU men 10, etc. (2); Cass co 13.14.1; HI Ez 5.16.27, etc. (2); RUF pri 3.2.6; LJ; VG si non 2/3 (alt. nisi 1/3) ~si non: AM Ps 37.21, etc. (2); AU men 10 an: QU pro 1.22.30 si: AM Ps 48.25; AU Ps 120.11 nisi: AU Ps 29.2.7; Cass co 13.14.1; HI Ez 5.16.27, etc. (2); RUF pri 3.2.6; LJ; VG 1:12 dedi ~ de dvka

128

LESLIE DOSSEY do: CY or 26 (CC 3A.106); MAX II consumpsit: FU inc 46 (CC 91.349, P); h 94 (PL 57.471C); ORO ap 20.6 LJ; VG (CSEL 5.635); QU pro 1.22.30 (CC 1:17 cornua tria~ORI Mt 13.8 (CB 60.38); RUF Nm 13.7 (CB 30.117); 40.201) TE fu 2.3 (CC 2.1137); LJ trado: ORI Mt 13.8 (CB 40 Origenes 10, p 201) sunt: VG tres ordines: LJ, cf. ternis ordinibus: RUF pri 3.2.6 (CB 22.255, P) a 1:19 venit~g lhen irruit: LJ; VG irruens: AU ci 20.19 (CC 48.733, P); FU inc 46 (CC 91.350) spiritus spiritus malignus: FU inc 46; var. LJ spiritus magnus: LJ ventum: HI 76.150, P) Os 3.13.14/15 (CC

in manum tuam 10/12 (alt. in manu tua 2/12)~e n cg xeiri sou *in manu tua: ORO ap. 20.6; TE fu 2.3; LJ; VG in manus tuas: CY or 26; QU pro 1.22.30; MAX II h 94 in potestate: RUF Nm 13.7, cf. dedit satanae potestatem TE Marc 5.8 (CC 1.701), diabolo potestas est data AN h Esc 14, 172, P om.: ORI Mt 13.8 cave ne~CY or 26; QU pro 1.22.30 ne: MAX II h 94 non: RUF Nm 13.7 noli: ORO ap. 20.6; LJ in eum ne: VG, cf. in ipsum _ ne TE fu 2.3 tangas~CY or 26; MAX II h 94; QU pro 1.22.30 contingas: RUF Nm 13.7 tangere: ORO ap 20.6; LJ extenderis manum: TE fu 2.3; cf. extendas manum tuam VG 1:14 asinae~LJ; VG asinae fetuosae: Gloss, 11 1:15 remansi~PS-FU s 71 (PL 65.943D) liberatus: LJ evasi: VG 1:16 combussit~AN h Esc 14, 173

ventus vehemens: VG ab eremo a deserto: FU inc 46; HI Os 3.13.14/15; LJ a regione deserti: VG tetigit:~FU inc 46; LJ percusserit: HI Os 3.13.14/15 concussit: VG, cf. concussis angulis PSMAX ep 1 (PL 57.932B) cecidit super~e pi pesen e ` [alt. *ruina occidit (ruina occidit ejus lios 443A, cf. 434B)] *cecidisset supra: RUF pri 3.2.6 (CB 22.255, P) *cecidit _ oppressit et lios: AU s sy 3.10 (CC 46.193, P) ruit: LJ; cf. HI Os 3.13.14/15 fecerit eam super lios ruere corruens oppressit: VG; cf. domus Iob conruit VER cant Az. 8 (CC 93.90, P) *ruina eius lios epulantes occidit: AN h Esc 14, 173, P; cf. cuius lios ruina cum exstingueret PS-AU s 50 (PL 39.1841);

129 THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA domum deiciens lios eius occidit AU ci procidens in terram: HI ep 118.2.3 20.19 (CC 48.733, P) (CSEL 55.436); PS-BAS cons 4; var. LJ una simul ruina compressit: FU inc 46 (CC 91.350); cf. repentina ruina comconruens in terram: VG pressit PS-FU s 71 (PL 65.944A, P) oravit~var. LJ ruina oppressit: HI Ps h 96 (CC adorauit: PS-BAS cons 4; HI ep 78.444), cf. ruina nuntiarentur oppressi: 118.2.3; LJ; VG AU quaest Lev 81 (CC 33.225)
uno ruinae impetu adempti: TE pat 14.2 (CC 1.315, P) 1:20 conscidit~LJ *consciderit: PS-Chry cons 1.4 (PG 40.1160, P) scidit: AMst q 109.7 (CSEL 50.260, P); PS-BAS cons 4 (PG 31.1693B, P); VG vestimenta sua (alt. *vestem suam 470B, 439A)~LJ ~vestem suam: PS-Chry cons 1.4 vestimenta: AMst q 109.7 vestimentum proprium: PS-BAS cons 4 tunicam suam: VG (var. vestimenta sua) totondit~AMst q 109.7; PS-BAS cons 4; LJ; *totondisse: HI Jr 2.44 (CSEL 59.104, P) tonso: VG comam capitis comam capitis sui: AMst q 109.7; LJ sui capitis comam: PS-BAS cons 4 capillos: HI Jr 2.44 capite: VG aspersit terram super caput suum in eam terrae pulverem sparsit: PS-BAS cons 4 om.: LJ; VG prostravit se in terra *se humi prostravit: PS-FU s 71 (PL 65.944A, P) proieciens in terram: LJ 1:21 nudus et~AM inst 3.19 (PL 16.324C), etc. (2); HI Eph 3.5.20 (PL 26.562C), etc. (4) *et nudus: CAE s 158a.1 (CC 104.649 5PS-AU s Mai 3); PS-AUG s erem 49 (PL 40.1332); LJ; VG nudus etiam: PS-AU s erem 58 (PL 40.1341); PS-AU s Mai 3.1, ed. A. Mai, Novae Patrum Bibliothecae I, 7; PS-BAS cons 4 (PG 31.1693C); CY te 3.6 (CC 3.94); CY mort 10 (CC 3A.21) nudus iterum: GAU Praef 39 (CSEL 68.11); GAU 13.34 (CSEL 68.124) nudus quoque: HI Ps h 96 (CC 78.444) nudus: AM 118 Ps 12.29 (CSEL 62.268), etc. (2); AMst Tm 6.7 (CSEL 81.3.289); AU ci 1.10 (CC 47.11), etc. (3); CAE s 114.6 (CC 103.477); Cass co 6.10.8 (CSEL 13.165); PAU ep 13.21 (CSEL 29.103); PEL Dem 6 (PL 30.23A); QU pro 1.22.30 (CC 60.39); VG ibo~AM 118 Ps 12.29; PS-AU s erem 58; PS-AU s Mai 3.1; CY te 3.6; CY mort 10; CAE s 158a.1; HI Ps h 96; cf. ire PS-AU s Mai 107 (PL 47.1148, P) exibo: AM o^ 1.38.191 (PL 16.86B), etc. (2), cf. abibo AM inst 3.19 (PL 16.324C) vadam: LJ, cf. vado PS-BAS cons 4 revertar: AMst Tm 6.7 (CSEL 81.3.289); AU ci 1.10, etc. (3); PSAU s erem 49; CAE s 114.6; Cass co 6.10.8; GAU praef 39, etc. (2); PAU ep 13.21; QU pro 1.22.30; VG redeam: HI Eph 3.5.20, etc. (4); PEL Dem 6

130

LESLIE DOSSEY pergam: AM Ps 35.29 (CSEL 64.69) om.: AM 118 Ps 12.29, etc. (6); AMst Tm 6.7; AU Ps 30, 2.3.12 (CC moriar: AM Ps 48.24 (CSEL 64.376), 38.221), etc. (7); Cass co 6.10.8 etc. (2); cf. moriturus es AM Ps 61.32 (CSEL 13.165, var. in scla W ); CAE s (CSEL 64.396) 54.4 (CC 103.238), etc. (4); CY te 3.6 (CC 3.94,zin saecula E); CY mort sub terram~PS-AU s erem 58 (5S 10 (CC 3A.21); PS-CY ep 4 (CSEL Mai 3.1 A); PS-BAS cons 4 (PG 3.3.275); GAU Praef 39 (CSEL 31.1693C); CY te 3.6; CY mort 10; 68.11); PS-FU s 71 (PL 65.944A); HI CAE s 158a.1 (5PS-AU s Mai 3); ep 118.2.3 (CSEL 55.436), etc. (2); *subter terram: PS-AU s Mai 3.1 PS-MAX ep 1 (PL 57.931D); QU pro 1.22.30 (CC 60.39); RUR 2.39 (CC in terram: AMst Tm 6.7; AU ci 1.10, 64.378); LJ; VG etc. (3); PS-AU s Mai 107 (PL 47.1148, P); CAE s 114.6; GAU praef 1:22 quae ei acciderunt 39, etc. (2); HI Ps h 96; PAU ep 13.21; QU pro 1.22.30 *quae acciderunt ei: RUR 2.39 (CC eo: AM 118 Ps 12.29 illuc: PS-AUG s erem 49; Cass co 6.10.8; PEL Dem 6; LJ; VG hinc: AM inst 3.19 ibi: AM Ps 35.29 om.: AM 118 Ps 14.16 (CSEL 62.309), etc. (5); HI Eph 3.5.20, etc. (4) 64.378) quae contigerunt ei: CY te 3.6 (CC 3.94, acciderunt V); AU pec 2.10.16 (CSEL 60.8788, P); cf. quae contigerant ei HI ep 118.3.1 (CSEL 55.437, P); LJ om.: HI Ps h 66 (CC 78.39); RUF Ct 2 (CB 33.172) 1:22/2:10 nihil peccavit (alt. non)260 ~nihil: AM Jb 3.3.9 (CSEL 32.2.253); CY te 3.6 (CC 3.94), etc. (3); RUR 2.39; LJ non: AM 118 Ps 3.13 (CSEL 62.47); AU pec 2.10.16; RUF Ct 2; HI ep 118.3.1, etc. (2); LJ; VG nusquam: AM Lc 4.39 (CC 14.120); AU Ps 103.4.7 (CC 40.1527) 1:22 neque in conspectu domini, neque in labiis suis (word order) labiis suis in conspectu domini: CY te 3.6 labiis suis ante dominum: AU pec 2.10.16 labiis suis coram Deo: RUF Ct 2 in labiis suis: AU Jul 2.2 (PL 44.674)
260 Although in the statistical count I used nihil as the dominant reading, I did not count those authors with non as di^ering from Ps. Orig.

sicut domino placuit~AM 118 Ps 12.29; AU Ps 30, 2.3.12 (CC 38.221), etc. (2); (AU) s 21 (PL 46.912); PSBAS cons 4; CAE s 132.1 (CC 103.542); Cass co 6.10.8; PS-CY ep 4 (CSEL 3.3.275); GAU praef 39; HI ep 118.2.3; QU bar 2.10.10 (CC 60.483); RUR 2.39 (CC 64.378), etc. (2); LJ; VG *sicut placuit domino: HI Eph 3.5.20 *ut domino placuit: RUF Ex 8.6 (CB 29.234); RUF Gn 8.10 (CB 29.86) ut domino visum est: HI Ez h 4.4 (SC 352.174); TE cast 2.1 (CC 2.1016) sicut domino visum est: CY mort 10 (CC 3A.21); PS-Chry cons 1.4 (PG 40.1168, P); RUR 2.4 (CC 64.337) in saecula: [AU] s 346A (PLS 2.438); PS-BAS cons 4; CAE s 114.6 (CC 103.477); var. Cass co; PS-Chry cons 1.4; var. CY te; HI Ez h 4.4; HIL Ps 118 (CSEL 22.384); PEL Dem 6 (PL 30.23A)

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA labiis suis: AM 118 Ps 3.13; HI Ps h 66 a malo: VG (CC 78.39) perseverans~Petil. ap. labiis: RUR 2.39 (CC 64.378) 2.49.113 coram domino: HI ep 118.3.1; LJ om.: VG 1:22/2:10 in conspectu domini ~in conspectu domini: CY te 3.6 (CC 3.94), etc. (3) *in conspectu dei: AM Lc 4.39 (CC 14.120) ante dominum: AU pec 2.10.16; LJ coram domino: HI ep 118.3.1; LJ coram Deo: RUF Ct 2 om.: AU Jul 2.2; AM Jb 3.3.9 (CSEL 32.2.253), etc. (3); HI Ps h 66; RUR 2.39; VG 1:22/2:10 in labiis suis~AU Jul 2.2, cf. in labiis: var CY te 3.6 (CC 3.94, MS E F ) *labiis suis: AM Jb 3.3.9, etc. (4); AU pec 2.10.16; CY te 3.6, etc. (3); HI Ps h 66; RUF Ct 2; LJ; VG labiis: RUR 2.39 (CC 64.378) om.: HI ep 118.3.1; LJ; VG 2:3 respexisti~Petil. ap. AU Pet 2.49.113 (CSEL 52.86) animadvertisti: HI ep 118.3.1 (CSEL 55.437); PS-MAX ep 1 (PL 57.932B); LJ considerasti: PEL Dem 6 (PL 30.22C); VG om. ad~HI ep 118.3.1; PS-MAX ep 1; PEL Dem 6; LJ; VG in: Petil. ap. AU Pet 2.49.113 ab omnibus operibus malis *ab omni opere malo: PS-MAX ep 1 ab omni malo: Petil. ap. AU Pet 2.49.113; HI Ep 118.3; PEL Dem 6; LJ perseverat: HI ep 118.3; LJ permanens: PS-MAX ep 1 retinens: VG

131
AU Pet

in simplicitate (alt. in innocentia 456D)~Petil. ap. AU Pet 2.49.113 *in innocentia sua et in simplicitate cordis: PS-MAX ep 1 in innocentia: HI ep 118.3; LJ; cf. innocentiam VG 2:4 corium~Petil. ap. AU Pet 2.49.113 (CSEL 52.86); HI ep 108.17.1 (CSEL 55.328), etc. (3); LJ pellem: PS-BAS cons 4 (PG 31.1693D); VG omnia quaecumque~var. LJ *omne quodcumque: AU Pet 2.49.113 quaecumque: AM Ps 37.21 (CSEL 64.152) omnia quae: HI ep 108.17, etc. (3); LJ cuncta quae: VG habuerit~AU Pet 2.49.113; HI ep 108.17, etc. (3); LJ habet: AM Ps 37.21; VG possidet: HI ep 66.12 (CSEL 54.662) dabit pro anima sua (alt. *dabit ut eruat 461CD)~HI ep 108.17, etc. (2); LJ; VG *pro anima sua dabit: AM Ps 37.21; Petil. ap. AU Pet 2.49.113; PS-BAS cons 4 (PG 31.1693D) dare potest pro anima sua: HI ep 66.12 2:5 porrige extende: HI ep 108.17 (CSEL 55.328); LJ

132

LESLIE DOSSEY ne tetigeris~PRIM 3.9.4 (CC 92.147) mitte: AM Ps 37.21 (CSEL 64.152); PS-BAS cons 4 (PG 31.1693D); QU *ne tangas: AU loc Gen 133 (CC pro 1.22.30 (CC 60.39); VG 33.394) om. scies~AU men 10.24 (CSEL custodi: AM pae 1.13.62, etc. (2); 41.500); JUS-U Ct 107 (PL 67.980C); PS-AU s 50; Cass co 7.12.3; HI ep HI ep 108.17, etc. (2); LJ 118.3.5; MAX II h 94; ORO 20.6; QU pro 1.22.30; RUF Nm 13.7; TE fu scies: QU pro 1.22.30 2.3; LJ; cf. custodiret AM Ps 37.21 vide: PS-BAS cons 4 (CSEL 64.152, P), custodiat AM Ps 37.26 (CSEL 64.155, P); custodire PSvideamus: AM Ps 36.30 (CSEL 64.94) BAS cons 4 (PG 31.1693C, P) videbis: VG serva: ORI Mt 13.8 (CB 40.201); VG Si non~AU men 10.24; cf. si _ non sed non: PS-AUG s erem 49 AM Ps 36.30 2:7 plaga~AMst q 118.8 (CSEL an: PS-BAS cons 4; QU pro 1.22.30 50.357); AN h Esc 14, 173, P; AU Ps 90.1.2 (CC 39.1256, P); PS-FU s 71 nisi: HI ep 108.17, etc. (2); JUS-U Ct (PL 65.944B, P) 107; LJ quod: VG tibi benedixerit~se eu locg sei ulcere: AM Jb 2.4 (CSEL 32.2.212), etc. (4); HI Ez h 4.8 (SC 352.186); RUF Ex h 7.2 (SC 321.212); VG; cf. ulceribus AM ep 75a.4 (CSEL 82.3.84, P), etc. (2) uulnere: AN h Esc 14, 173, P; AU s sy 3.10 (CC 46.193), etc. (7); PS-BAS cons 4 (PG 31.1694A); CAE s 132.3 (CC 103.543); Cass co 6.4 (CSEL 13.158); HI Ps h 66 (CC 78.39), etc. (2); QU pro 1.22 (CC 60.39); RUF Rm 7.2 (VL 34.561); LJ saevissima~saevissimo: HI Ez h 4.8 *saevo AN h Esc 14, 173, P trado: AM pae 1.13.62 (CSEL 73.149), etc. (2); Cass co 7.12.3 (CSEL 13.192); HI ep 118.3.5 (CSEL 55.438); MAX II h 94 (PL 57.471C); ORI Mt 13.8 (CB 40.201); ORO 20.6 (CSEL 5.636); QU pro 1.22.30 (CC 60.39); TE fu 2.3 (CC 2.1137); var. LJ tradam: PS-AU s 50 (PL 39.1842); LJ do _ in potestate: PS-AU s erem 49 (PL 40.1332) do in eum potestatem: RUF Nm 13.7 (CB 30.117) est: VG crudeli: AN h Esc 14, 173, P magna nimis: AMst q 118.8 malo: AM pae 1.13.62 (CSEL 73.149) gravi: AM Jb 2.4 (CSEL 32.2.212), etc. (2); AU Ps 103.4.7 (CC 40.1527), etc. (5); CAE s 132.3; HI Ps h 96 (CC 78.444); QU pro 1.22 gravissimo: AU Cre 3.48.52 (CSEL 52.460) pessimo: PS-BAS cons 4; Cass co 6.4; HI Ps h 66; RUF Ex h 7.2; RUF Rm 7.2; LJ; VG

*benedixerit tibi: AU men 10.24; JUS-U Ct 107; HI ep 108.17, etc. (2); LJ te _ benedicit: AM PS 36.30 (CSEL 64.94, var. benedicat Bav) benedicat tibi: QU pro I.22.30; VG; cf. tibi benedicat: PS-BAS cons 4 2:6 tradidi*tradidit PS-BAS cons 4 (PG 31.1693D, P)

133 THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA a pedibus usque ad caput~AM Ps saniem saeuis uulnerum uibicibus: AM 37.57.3 (CSEL 64.181), etc. (2); HI 118 Ps 14.16 (CSEL 62.309) Ez h 4.8; RUF Rm 7.2; LJ saniem vulneris: PS-FU s 70 (PL *a pede usque ad caput: PS-BAS 65.942D) cons 4 saniem: CAE s 132.1; Cass co 6.10.6; cf. a capite usque ad pedes: AM of 1.12.41 sania QU pro I.22.30 (CC 60.39, P); (PL 16.39A); AU s sy 3.10, etc. (8); saniei PS-AU s 50; LJ; VG PS-AU s 50 (PL 39.1841); PS-AU s sanies: AN h Esc 14, 173, P 52.3 (PL 39.1845); CAE s 114.6 (CC 103.477), etc. (2); RUF Ex 7.2; cf. a om. deuentem~AM Jb 1.2.5, etc. (2); capite usque ad unques: AMst q 118.8 PS-BAS cons 4; LJ; VG (CSEL 50.357)
a planta pedis usque ad verticem eius: VG 2:8 accepit testam (alt. accepta testa 469D)~e laben o strakon tulit testam: PS-BAS cons 4 (PG 31.1694A) tulit sibi testam: LJ testam sumens: RUF Rm 7.2 (VL 34.561) testa: AN h Esc 14, 173; PS-AU s 50 (PL 39.1841, P); CAE s 132.1 (CC 103.543); Cass co 6.10.6 (CSEL 13.164); VG ut raderet 5/6 (alt. radebat 1/6 469D)~ut raderet: LJ*ut _ raderet PS-BAS cons 4 *raderet: RUF Rm 7.2 radebat: AM Ps 37.80 (CSEL 64.159, P); PS-AUG s 50; CAE s 132.1; Cass co 6.10.6 abradit: AN h Esc 14, 173, P deradebat: VG saniem suam 2/6 (alt. *saniem vulnerum suorum 2/6; saniem 1/6) *saniem vulnerum: PS-BAS cons 4 *saniem _ suorum ulcerum: AM Ps 37.30.1 (CSEL 62.159, P) saniem de ulceribus suis: RUF Rm 7.2 saniem ulcerum: AM Jb 1.2.5 (CSEL 32.2.213) deuentem: CAE s 132.1; AM 118 Ps 14.16 uentem: PS-AU s 52.1 (PL 39.1844 5CAE s 132); RUF Rm 7.2; cf. uentes AN h Esc 14, 173, P prouentem: Cass co 6.10.6, cf. prouente QU pro 1.22.30; prouvium PS-AU s 50 super acervum stercoris *acervum stercoris: PS-FU s 70 (PL 65.942D, P, and 943A, P) *in acervo stercoris: AN h Esc 14, 173, P in stercore: AM Lc 7.168 (CC 14.272, P); AU Ps 103.4.7 (CC 40.1526), etc.; PS-BAS cons 4; CAE s 114.6 (CC 103.477), etc. (2); LJ in sterquilinio: CY-G cen, ed. Modesto, Studien zur Cena Cypiani, 140; Egeria (SC 296.194); HI Is 18.45.22/22 (CC 73A.764); ZE 1.15.6 (CC 22.61, P); VG 2:9 quousque sustines*quodusque sustinebis LJ quamdiu pateris haec: PS-AU s 1.6 (PL 39.1739) quamdiu ista et ista pateris: AU s sy 3.10 (CC 46.193) et ecce quae pateris: GAU praef 24 (CSEL 68.7) ecce quae pateris: PS-AU s 50 (PL 39.1841):

LESLIE DOSSEY quanta mala patimur: (AU) s 21 (PL tanquam 4/7 (alt. *ut 2/7, sicut 1/7) 46.913) ~tanquam: AM ep 76.17 (CSEL aliquod verbum~AM ep 76.16 82.3.117), etc. (2); AU s sy 3.10 (CC (CSEL 82.3.117); AU s sy 3.10, etc. 46.194), etc. (12); PS-BAS cons 4 (PG (3); QU pro 1.22.31 (CC 60.39); LJ 31.1694A); CAE s 114.6 (CC 103.477), etc. (2); CY te 3.14 (CC 3.105), etc. (2); *verbum aliquod: CY te 3.14 (CC 3.105) QU pro 1.22.31 (CC 60.39); Vict. Vit 1.50 (CSEL 7.22); LJ unum verbum: PS-BAS cons 4 (PG 31.1694A) sicut: AM o^ 1.28.191 (PL 16.86B), etc. (2) aliquid: AU Ps 70 S 1.14 (CC 3.952), etc. (5); (AU) s 21 (PL 46.913); PSquasi: AU Ps 133.2 (CC 40.1936), etc. AU s 50 (PL 39.1841); var. CY te (2); PS-AU s 52.3 (PL 39.1845); PSAU s 34.6 (PL 39.1813); HI Gal 3.6 aliquem sermonem: GAU praef 38 (PL 26.458C, P); VG (CSEL 68.10) verbum: PS-AU s 1.6 (PL 39.1739); Cassiod. Ps 70.13 (CC 97.634) blasphema: CAE s 132.2 (CC 103.543) benedic: VG in dominum~AU s sy 3.10; CY te 3.14; QU pro 1.22.31; var. LJ *in domino: PS-BAS cons 4; LJ in deum: AM ep 76.16, etc. (2); AU Ps 90.1.2 (CC 39.1256), etc. (5); (AU) s 21; Cassiod. Ps 70.13 contra dominum: PS-AU s 1.6; var. CY; GAU praef 38 adversus deum: PS-AU s 50 deo: VG 2:10 respiciens ad eam intuitus eam: CY te 3.14 (CC 3.105, ad eam X ) intuens: LJ om.: VG zquare~ ina ti om.: AM 118 Ps 12.28 (CSEL 62.269); AU 93.19 (CC 39.1320), etc. (13); (AU) s 21 (PL 46.913); CY te 3.14 (CC 3.105), etc. (2); CAE s 132.3 (CC 103.543); GAU praef 39 (CSEL 68.10); QU pro 1.22.31 (CC 60.39); Vict. Vit 1.50 (CSEL 7.22); LJ; VG velut: GAU praef 39 (CSEL 68.10) insipientibus~AM 118 Ps 12.28 (CSEL 62.269); AU s sy 3.10, etc. (12); PS-BAS cons 4; CAE s 114.6, etc. (2); GAU praef 39; HI Gal 3.6; QU pro 1.22.31; Vict. Vit 1.50; cf. insipientium AM o^ 1.28.191 ineptis: CY mort 10 (CC 3A.2); CY te 3.14 (CC 3.105, insipientibus X) stultis: LJ; VG accepimus 5/6 (alt. suscepimus 1/6) ~accepimus AM Jb 3.2.3 (CSEL 32.2.249); HI Gal 3.6 (PL 26.458D); QU pro 1.22.31; RUF Ex h 8.6 (SC 321.274); LJ suscepimus: AM o^ 1.28.191; AU Ps 70.1.16 (CC 39.953), etc. (4); PS-AU s 52.3 (PL 39.1845); PS-AU s 34.6 (PL 39.1813); Cass co 6.10.7; GAU praef 39; Jo-N 18 (PLS 4.789); PSMAX ep 1 (PL 57.931D); var LJ; VG excepimus: PS-BAS cons 4; CY te 3.14; CY mort 10; MAX s Mu 72.2.4950 (CC 23.302) percepimus: AU s sy 3.10, etc. (10); CAE s 132.3 (CC 103.543) recepimus: CAE s 114.6 toleremus~PS-AU s 52.3 (5CAE s 132); CAE s 132.3

134

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA *toleramus var. CY mort 10; var. CY om.: VG te; PS-BAS cons 4; QU pro 1.22.31 Suitarum*Suites: VG tolerabimus: AU Ps 93.19 (CC Sauchaeorum : AM Jb 2.1.2 39.1320), etc. (2); RUF Ex h 8.6; CY te 3.14 (CC 3.105, toleramus V; tolleraSaucites: LJ mus E F); CY mort 10; GAU praef 39; MAX s Mu 72.2.50 tyrannus~AM Jb 2.1.2; LJ sustinebimus: AM o^ 1.28.191; AU s sy 3.10, etc. (9); CAE s 114.6; Cass co 6.10.6 sustineamus: AU pat 13 (CSEL 41.674), etc. (3); PS-AU s 34.6; HI Gal 3.6; Jo-N 18; PS-MAX ep 1; LJ sustinemus: AM Jb 3.2.3 suscipiamus: VG 2:10 quae ei/illi acciderunt *quae acciderunt ei: AM Lc 4.39 (CC 14.120); CY te 3.14 (CC 3.105); LJ quae contigerunt ei: CY mort 10 (CC 3A.21) inter illa omnia quae dixit: AU Ps 103.4.7 (CC 40.1527) om.: AM Jb 3.3.9 (CSEL 32.2.253); VG 2:10 in labiis suis neque in conspectu domini (alt. zneque 493B) (word order) *labiis suis in conspectu domini: CY te 3.14; CY mort 10 (CC 3A.21) *labiis suis in conspectu dei: AM Lc 4.39 *labiis suis ante dominum: LJ om. in conspecu domini: AM Noe 3.7 (CSEL 32.1.418), etc. (2); VG 2:11 Themanitarum *Themanites: LJ; VG Themanorum: AM Jb 2.1.2 (CSEL 32.2.233) dux rex: AM Jb 2.1.2; LJ om.: VG Nomadarum Naamathites: LJ; VG Minaeorum: AM Jb 2.1.2; LJ rex~AM Jb 2.1.2; LJ om.: VG

135

3:2 diem nativitatis suae 2/4 / diem suum 2/4 ~diem nativitatis suae: RUF Lv h 8.3 (CB 29.397) diei suo: VG, cf. diei suae LJ diei: AM Lc 4.39 (CC 14.120, P) 3:3 dictum est~var. LJ; VG dixerunt: HI Jr 4.28 (CSEL 59.246); RUF Lv h 8.3 (CB 29.397); LJ 3:17 requieverunt (520A) cf. mitigaverunt: Gloss, 11 deposuerunt: LJ cessaverunt: VG 3:19 pusillus (520C)~LJ parvus: HI Is 8.24.1/3 (CC 73.316); VG servus non timens dominum suum~HI Is 8.24.1/3; var. LJ servus non metuens dominum suum: LJ servus liber a domino suo: VG 7:3 sustinui expectavi: AM Jb 2.4 (CSEL 32.2.213); LJ habui: VG

LESLIE DOSSEY resuscitabit: AM 118 Ps 10.18 (CSEL menses supervacuos (alt. *vacuos) 62.214) ~menses vacuos: AM Jb 2.4; VG suscitabis: AM Sat 2.67 (CSEL 73.286); menses vanos: LJ Clem R lat 26, ed. Morin, Anecdota Maredsolana II, 27; HI Ez 11.37.1/14 7:5 bullit (469B) (CC 75.515) fermentatur: AM Jb 2.4 (CSEL resuscitare: AM Jb 1.5.15 (CSEL 32.2.213) 32.2.221) induta est: VG excitet: Gloss, 18 concrescet: LJ resurget: LJ corpus meum~LJ mihi corpus: AM Jb 2.4 caro mea: VG in putredine vermium~AM Jb 2.4 *putredine vermium: LJ putredine et sordibus pulveris: VG macero liquefacio: AM Jb 2.4 dissoluens: AM 32.2.253, P) Jb 3.3.9 (CSEL resurrecturum est: JUL-E Jb 19.26 (CC 88.54, in graeco) surrecturus sim et rursum circumdabor: VG, cf. resurrecturus sum et rursum circumdabor: PS-BAS cons 12 (PG 31.1701B) 19:26 pellem meam~AM Jb 1.5.15; HI Ez 11.37.1/14; RUF sy 42 corium meum: AM 118 Ps 10.18 meam cutem: Gloss, 18 cutis mea: LJ corpus meum: AM Sat 2.67; Clem R 26; JUL-E Jb 19.26 pelle mea: VG hausit *haurit: JUL-E Jb 19.26; RUF sy 42 portavit: AM Jb 1.5.15; Gloss, 18 passum est: AM Sat 2.67; Clem R 26 sustinet: HI Ez 11.37.1/14 patitur: LJ om.: VG haec~Gloss, 18; RUF sy 42; LJ ista: HI Ez 11.37.1/14 talia: JUL-E Jb 19.26 multa: AM Sat 2.67; Clem R 26 om.: AM Jb 1.5.15; VG mala~AM Sat 2.67; Clem R 26

136

tabesco: JUL-E Jb 7.38 (CC 88.22, in graeco) infundo: LJ sulcos glaebas: AM Jb 2.4, AM Jb 3.3.9 glebas: LJ, cf. glebis JUL-E Jb 7.38 ex vulnerum meorum humore *vulnerum suorum sanie et umore: AM Jb 3.3.9 saniem radens ulcerum: AM Jb 2.4 radens saniem: LJ cutis mea aruit et contracta est: VG 19:25 suscitaturus est (388C) *resuscitaturus est: RUF sy 42 (CC 20.179) suscitabit: RUF sy 43 (CC 20.179)

THE LAST DAYS OF VANDAL AFRICA om.: AM Jb 1.5.15; Gloss, 18; HI Ez de medio~Cass co 23.5.1; LJ 11.37.1/14; JUL-E Jb 19.26; RUF sy de mediis: PS-AU spec 12 42; LJ; VG 29:14 eram indutus *indutus eram: PS-AU spec 12 (CSEL 12.369); PS-BAS cons 4 (PG 31.1693A); LJ indutus sum VG, cf. induti sunt HI ep 132.13.3 (CSEL 56.235) vestitus eram: AU perf 11.27 (CSEL 42.26), cf. eram vestitus LUC Ath 1.40 (CC 8.68) vestitus iudicio*vestitus eram iudicio PS-BAS cons 4 vestiebar iudicio LJ vestivit me _ iudicio meo: VG circumdedi mihi iudicium: AU perf 11.27 circumdatus aequitate: PS-AU spec 12 coopertus iudicium: LUC Ath 1.40 tanquam vestimento *sicut vestimento et diademate: VG sicut chlamyde: AU perf 11.27; PS-BAS cons 4; LJ om.: LUC Ath 1.40 29:17 confregi~LUC Ath 1.40 (CC 8.68); LJ *confringens: PS-AU spec 12 (CSEL 12.369) conterens: 13.645) Cass co 23.5.1 (CSEL om.: LUC Ath 1.40; VG dentium~Cass co 23.5.1; LJ

137

dentibus: PS-AU spec 12; LUC Ath 1.40; VG rapinas~Cass co 23.5.1; LJ *rapinam: PS-AU spec 12; LUC Ath 1.40 praedam: VG abstuli~LUC Ath 1.40 auferebam: PS-AU spec 12; VG extorsi: LJ 31:20 ad _ tonsuram (386D) *de tonsura: LJ velleribus: AM of 1.11 (PL 16.38C) de velleribus: Cass co 6.10.5 (CSEL 13.164); CAE s 131 (CC 103.539); VG ovium~Cass co 6.10.5; CAE s 131; LJ; VG agnorum: AM of 1.11 omnium pauperum eorum (inrmorum): AM of 1.11 inrmorum: CAE s 131; Cass co 6.10.5; LJ om.: VG scapulae humeri: AM of 1.11; CAE s 131; Cass co 6.10.5; LJ latera: VG calefactae sunt~AM of 1.11; CAE s 131; LJ calefactus est: VG caleebant: Cass co 6.10.5 31:32 hospes (386D)~LJ

conterebam: VG molas~PS-AU spec 12; Cass co 23.5.1; LUC Ath 1.40; LJ; VG iniustorum~PS-AU spec 12 iniquorum: Cass co 23.5.1; LUC Ath 1.40; LJ iniqui: VG

138

LESLIE DOSSEY peregrinus: AM of 1.11 (PL 16.38C); exibat: GAU praef 24 VG de domo sua*domum eius GAU nunquam praef 24 non: AM of 1.11; LJ; VG foris~AM of 1.11; LJ; VG ianuam meam: LJ vacuum sinu vacuo: GAU praef 24; LJ 42:7 quia (510)

mansit~VG habitabat: AM of 1.11 manebat: LJ janua~Cass 13.164); LJ co 6.10.5 (CSEL

enim: AU Ps 103.4.8 (CC 40.1528); LUC Ath 1.41 (CC 8.70); LJ quoniam: VG locuti estis~AU Ps 103.4.8; LUC Ath 1.41; LJ *estis locuti: VG

ostium: AM of 1.11 ostium meum: VG domus mea: CAE s 131 (CC 103.539) omni advenienti~Cass co 6.10.5; LJ *omni venienti: AM of 1.11 omnibus viatoribus: CAE s 131 viatori: VG patuit~CAE s 131; VG patebat: AM of 1.11; LJ 31:34 dimisit (386D): *dimisi: LJ om.: GAU praef 24 (CSEL 68.7) pauperem: *pauper: GAU praef 24 inrmum: LJ exire~LJ

quidquam veritatis verum quidquam: AU Ps 103.4.8; LJ nihil _ veri: LUC Ath 1.41 rectum: VG in conspectu meo coram me: AU Ps 103.4.8; LUC Ath 1.41; LJ; VG sicut~AU Ps 103.4.8; LJ; VG famulus servus: AU Ps 103.4.8; LJ; VG