Qenneshre Fragmanı ve Edessa’lı Pikopos Daniel (665-84)
Nau ve Sachau, Edessa’lı Daniel'i yazar olarak kabul ediyorlar,
Hoyland yazarın başka bir editör tarafından parçaların birleştirildiğini
düşünmektedir.[1]
Penn’e göre çoğu Muhtemelen sekizinci yüzyılda yazılmıştır.
Fragmanlar
Eduard Sachau, “Verzeichniss der syrischen Handschriften der
koniglichen Bibliothek zu Berlin (Berlin: A. Asher &. co, 1899), 2.523-524;
François Nau, “Notice historique sur le monastère de Qartamin, suivie d'une
note sur le monastère de Qennesrè. (Extrait du tome II des Actes du XIVe
Congrès international des orientalistes, Alger 1905. Part 2 (Paris: 1907),
114-135; Gerrit J. Reinink, “Die Muslime in einer Sammlung von
Damonengeschichten des Klosters von Qennesrin” in VI Syniposium Syriacuni
1992, ed. Renć Lavenant (Romę: Pontificio Instituto Orientale, 1994), 335-346;
Michael Penn (2013). "Demons Gone Wild: An Introduction, and
Translation of the Syriac Qenneshre Fragment". Orientalia christiana
periodica. 79 (2): 367–399;
https://archive.org/details/nau_notice_historique_monastere_qartamin_et_qenneshre/page/n23/mode/2up
“And I Daniel, bishop of Aleppo (in the margin: d y Edessa) I questioned this demon a lot and he said to
me” (Nau, s.82)
Dipnot;
“1. Further down we find Aleppo once again in the text and Edessa
in the margin. The correct reading is undoubtedly Edessa, because further down
we will find this name in the text itself and Michael the Syrian (II, 429)
writes: "After the death of the venerable Severus, it happened in the time
of Mar Daniel, bishop of E - goddess, whom the demons possessed the brothers of
the convent of Qennesré. The Archimandrite sent for Mar Daniel, in order to be
able to calm these unfortunate people. This Daniel is undoubtedly the author of
the text that we publish. The invasions of the Persians, the Arabs and the
ardent struggles of the Monophysites and the Chalcedonians could provoke among
the monks certain contagious nervous crises directed, at least in part, against
the Monophysite doctrine; these crises were linked to the phenomena of
possession and a certain magician was even held responsible for them—Urbain
Grandier of that period. — Daniel intervened, as well as the temporal power
represented by the Emir Abdallah, then Daniel himself wrote up a tendential
account of these events, the remains of which we are publishing.” (Nau,
s.82)
[1] Seeing Islam
as Others Saw it. A survey and analysis of the Christian, Jewish and
Zoroastrian writings on Islam (Darwin; Princeton, 1997) s.142-147.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder