A greater problem in Fiey, he shares with others, that he trusts Thomas de Marga... like a dupe.
Interestingly Fiey knows plenty cases where Thomas, and sometimes his English translator Budge, are wrong, and tells us. If Fiey thinks Ishoʿyahb was writing before Boran's embassy to Aleppo, then we should have letters which mention that embassy - even (or especially) after the fact, to boast about it. We have no such letters and Siʿrt leaves him out. The simplest solution is that Ishoʿyahb wasn't there. Here is another spot where Thomas and/or Budge has/have erred.
Among Ishoʿyahb's pre-Boran letters, Fiey thinks some were penned from Mount "ʿAwé" (ʿAbe) before he became a bishop. Fiey's hypothesis is important to Fiey's monograph which splits these letters into two sequential chapters. I hasten to interject my personal sympathy toward this hypothesis. If Ishoʿyahb wasn't a bishop under Boran, then either it didn't occur to anybody to invite him to the embassy or else he tagged along without getting his name on the documents noted by Guidi's Khuzestan or (really) Thomas (sadly Siʿrt missed an opportunity here). But... that's my argument, half-built upon my case against Thomas. Fiey, trusting Thomas, needs a stronger argument. I do not read where Fiey provides one.
Elsewhere "Diptyques nestoriens du XIVe siecle", Analecta Bollandiana 81 (1963), 371-413; 385f. This teases Assyrie chrétienne. But... diptychs do not come with dates.
Despite my sympathy I must warn the hypothesis is under constraint. The letter #8 commemorating Yazdîn went to an abbot. Yazdîn died under Khusro II when, up to planting-season AG 939, there was yet no pope. Still. This does not mean that a mid-level monk at monastery A could just fire off a pep talk to monastery B. Bet-Garmai and Nisibin each had a Metropolitan Bishop; if we trust Thomas then so did Arbela. At least the former two will go to Aleppo together. Epistle #8 makes most sense if Ishoʿyahb is someone who matters... like a bishop.
BACKDATE 3/26
No comments:
Post a Comment