CHAPTER 11

SOME DISTINCTIVE THESES OF ERIUGENA'S ESCHATOLOGY IN HIS EXEGESIS

OF THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW

GL"ST:\VO A. PIE~t0:"/TE 1

I. Introduction

.'\.mong the scriptural texts cired by Eriugena in his account of the return ofall things co God, in Book V of the Peripliyse''" we find several passages ofSt. Matthew, in particular the parable of the Ten Virgins t~!_c_._~_5:~.-12), whose explanation1 immediately precedes the recapitulation (i11i.t-k;pli.11.tiL1.;is) clue doses the entire work. In his comment on chat parable, Eriugen.1 recalls how the Lord. sitting on the Mount of Olives. prophe-sied tp the disciples about the signs chat \vill foremn the desm1ction of the worid; 1 this is a reforence co the Esch.1cological Discourse" of .Mt. 24-25. Now. those chapters of eh~ Gospel~re. e~p~und~d ~[.length in an impor~ t:inr section (C2) of a group of L.ltin biblical hllmilies lJbelled by certain schol.m as c l-C2", whii.:h. Jccording to the hypothesis that I have summarily set forth in a previous paper.~ Clll be idc:ntiii.ed. at least in part, with Eriugena's Tmct.1t11s iu .\l,11lk11111, heretofore considered lost.

1. I wish to thJnk Ann Clc~on. Exc:,uti\c: Assimnt it the: Fa,ult1- of Philosophy. Nationll t.:mvc:rsicy of lrc:lanJ ~l.tv:iooth. for hJving c:ncc:rc:,f the tr:ins.:ript of the text onco 'omputc:r. I would also W.:c: to thank Jimc:s ~kfaoy anJ .M1,hac:I Dunne for .:h~king the: text JnJ mJk.ing un;-ro\c:mcnts.

2. PP V. Ml I :\-1018 D. Other F"lSSJgc:s of Sc. MJtChcw .:itc:J 111 the same: Book V uc: ~It. 11::?7 (f>P V. ')21) D). l l: :?S-:?9 (1011 BJ: 24:2~ 1_978 :\): 24::?9 t9% ,-\): 24:35 \887 B. 891) D. 991) :\): 24:36 (1)17 .-\): 25:41 i"'J:?l D. 93813-D): 25:44 i938 D).

3. pp v. 11)7 :\. :I( .J. "'Rc,hc:rchc:s sur I~ 'Tr.i,urus 111 ~b.chc:um' lttnbues .i Jean S'ot, ., {hc:reartc:r:

Rtcfurclit1). in G. VJn Ric:I - C. $cc:c:I - _I. Mc Evoy (eds.). M1Jn11ts S.w11u Eri11.i:tn.1, 77rt Bibi~ .in.I Hmnmtutics. lcuvc:n 1996. 321-350. The: c1-C2 .. homili~. gencr:ill} indudC'J in the: so-callc:J Op111 lm;c"'Jt:lwn i11 .\/Jttli.11'111rr 1=01~1) . .irmbucc:J 111 the

~tidJlc: :'.:CS to Sc. John Ch~~om:im. wer.. rerrimc:J in ~li~c: tn PG 5o. 756-798 .Hurn. :?-+-.>! = c I'"). JnJ ;:;q- -).;

ERll..:~~:\'.}"::,'.,S>~:-:-,.;:.>-~ 13. Pl' \'. l~H 7 D- In I L-\ \sc:r: j. .. ~t:irei1lon; ;'.'J~hli '~!=~tcur.1i\S\$'.:Jrofing{an:,?~< Theolo~y" . .31 l}), c.,mpare c~ 52 '>33:. Pw11iimti11111}~1,11!1:.1.~r/Sf~;;1;:1.)]11~{p.itliit~~ti:ztX~':i. f\.'l:H! U1rt iii. . . . : - . . ' ~".:. . .~ ~. '< :::.~ :~~'.;:,:~ }.(c~ ... ~~~f~\.;~.:-?~:::,.,~:: ~-~~.~~~,.~ ;-?'.

1 o. PP \'. 11.114 B: ;.,rui.f'"' .J11:l1u; . 11::11:.fu.1 ist.: .. 1fri,f,r ,_.;, !'lit.irt l'i.!.lmd. i:Jn .:1.>111pmJ with C 1 _q 79.2: H,m m:1111i11111 ii1111n i11111;.;;;~;; if;;.!;is~ -~,c~-.;~t}:i:;:;:'i;"~

. ' . ... -: .. ''"'--''.'If' 17. PP\", 1)15 C; .:ompJr~ .C:? 31 927: 1w1 si1111ir ,111111i,1 i ... j,;,.,,;,!iib1~~ ,. " ... , ~

.li,t11.IJ... : . -~:\;:~~:~~-1~4.:":I~j~;?f.~~-3::::~~~~~~;: .. 1:3. f'P \", 11)150: S

230 GUSTAVO A. PIEMONTE

ttbiqlti:- ~t, n111/oq11e c~11tinet11r loco (PP V, 992 A). Consequently; his "coming" will actually be nothing other than his apparitio in all creacun:s; his intelligible light mmc imp/et t>tmris ,,cculte, et 11111c apme impletraa est}1 We ineet thus in PP with the same ideas, and largely with the same wording. as in C2. Besides, C2 49b combines the evangelical sinillimde of the flash of lightning wi1:h _the two others. that of fire :and that of the sun;22 now, both are familiar to Eriugena, who tells U5i,, e.g., that, since the sunlight fills up the entire world (ftlr11111 m1111d111'1) it cannot move spatially, because there is no place left for it to go.:.i Almost the same phrases are used in C2 apropos of the So/ spiri- 11111/is. Christ, who in ltlfll 11idebi111r 1111111do. 2~ Finally, I would like to point out that in C2 52 also it is said that the meining of the assenion. '"Christ: ,.,.ill arrive", is that he, who is (already) among us.will appear in glory; now, PP offers a similar explanation of 1~11ire as .1pparere, when it cormnents on the "clouds" that will accompany the Son of Man's return.s

2. C2 47 describes the end of the world as a dissolution (ilia esse st1fve111fa, l'"1r m.11111s rlhim1 cre.Jl'it), citing in this report: Ps. 101 :26-27: the

~ ... ;\\'crts sh;1ll perish. prril111111. Enn if many refuse to believe it, ne

ERIUGENA'S ESCHATOLOGY AND HIS EXEGESIS OF.ST. MATTHEW 231

. of"those who try to convince themselves thafmany of the thing! that are made will endure for ever.":?ll As we will see lacer on, John is thereby rejecting very prestigious explanations of this central ten~c of the Christian eschatology;29 the accord between his personal exegesis and .that of C2 is thus all the more remarkable. I could add that according co the beautiful beginning ofC2 .J9c, the darkening of the

su~ and the moon and the fall of the stars before the arrival of the Son of Man (Mc. 2.J:29) are comparable to the upsetting of a house at the death of the paterfamilias. "'j Now, certain manuscripcs repeat here che thesis of the descmction of the whole world. 11 and this same thesis is explicitly held also in an obviously par3llel passage of PP V.Jl Besides, the analogy 1111111d11s I donms is in itself a favourite Eriugenian theme."

3. The commentary on Mt. 10:28, "Fear not them which kill the body", in C 1 25 gives the author the occasion to set forth views on the image of God in man and the soul-body relationship with ate identical co, or cognate with, those found in the recogn_ised works of Eriugena. 1"

27. Ps. 101:26-27 is cic~d anJ expounded in: PP II. 180.19-25 (561 A-B); IU, 92.19 tr (648 All); Ill, 214.1&-.20 (701 C); V, 890 D-891 A. In the chm bst t::ases, this text is :ac:i:omp:inied by Mc. 24:35: Co1tl11111 tt te"" tra11sib1111t . The argumen1:1tion a 111.zi1Jrt, is baseJ in C2 47 891) on the tr:iruicorin~ of ren1111 1i1ibili11111 1lt.1111i11.1 '''"' re:appe:an in the three tine pass:ages of PP just inJii::ated, but founded there on the passing :away of the he:ivens, 111a.~im.1 l"'fl 111111111i. All these texcs have as conmton background Dt Ci1. Dti, X:X. 24, 1 (see also XX 16).

28. PP m. 9.J.5-7 (648 B): $("(' :ilso v. 996 A. 29. See the references below, n. 61. JO. CH9c 918. " 31. In the re-lev:m1 stntence, PG 56 ~Js: ,;,,,,,,, conttistJtrrr m111i1l111, but cemin MSS.

of Famil) 4 otTer the vari:lnt: . ,,,,,IS Jmruitur rn11ml1u" (see J. \"all eanning (ed.). Opus l111rl1111n i11 .\fo1tthat111n, Prat:fati1J, Tumhout 1988 (CCL87 BJ, CLXXVlll).

32. Mt. 24:29 is cited in PP V, 995 D-996 A, where Eriu~na argues that this prophe'-1' is co be aken liicrall~, .i.s .mnoundng "t.,tim 1111111Ji Jestn1Cti1Jnmf sol11tWnmi1111t Cllrpon1111".

33. See PP IV. 98.13-14 (782 B): V, 1005 0: "po1t t1'tnio11trn h11i111 1111mdi. vtl11ti nii111Jarn '"'"'" Pruder\lius ofTro)"es :affimu he heard 6:omJohn himself the phnsc "in lwt 111.ui '""'" '""Ii tt tmat" (PLl 15, 1293 0). Note due in Old Irish the word for 'mundus' was J,,,,,,,,, (t:f. Dicti,,,,Jry ef th~ Irish L..uig1l4gt, Compact Edition, Dublin 1990, s.v.), which nu~ have stimulated the :uulogy in Eriugena's mind.

J4. (a) C I: 25 762: Ha11c [I( . .mirn.lln/ mi111 s"1o1111 Dt11s .JJ i1n.1.'li11nn s11o1111 /it, can be .:ompucdwith PPH. 9.;.D tT(567 B); IV, 108.19 lf(786 0):.:1..:.

lb) On Cl 25 763, see abo\e. n. 17; (t:) C I 25 763: C"'P"' .mtnn &"tSlimt11tur11 tit .mim.li lo.,ks like .a lirst rough sketch t)f PP

lV, 142..2.J 1(802 Ii): the rmterbl bo.1} is 'Yluti 'l...,JJ,,un 1't1til11t11tu111 ofrhe ft3Nral body.

232 GUSTAVO A. PIEMONTE

Then,. after stating tnat:che soul, the substance of man, does not suffer damage in its nature when its bodily garment is destroyed, he resom to an an::alogy with the fingernails, which grow again nan1rally (ex ipsa 11at11ra) when they are cut; similarly, after the body has been killed it will be. in due time. woven again more gloriow upon the soul. -1~ This analogy, inferring, from the natural regrowth of some pans of the hum3111 body, the future resurrection of the \Whole of it, reappears in PP V .as one of the e.wmp/11 proving that the resurrection of the dead will happen 1111111rali .1irt11re.;.There. the source is fonnally named and quoted: the A11ct,rat11s ofEpiphanius. a Greek work rarely cited in the West before Eriugena (who according to some scholars m;1y have

transl~ted it himsdt)Y A resurrection etTected:. by natur:il forces is one of the most singular eschatological concepnons of PP, at \vhich S11tri'tt.ir - as he himself tells - arrhed onl> after a long time and under the intluenat of new readings .. 'Ill That conception is not precisely st;tted in C t 25. but it is indeed in some way implied mere, in the ai:g11111e11111111 based. on the natural regeneration of the fingernails that I have just cited..

-k Obsen:,1g that it seems most unlikdy that the apologetic replr of the third servant in the parable of the talents (Mt . .25:.24-.25) might be gi\"cn by any sinner to the Lord in his glorious and fiightening ti.1ture Ad\ent. c2 53 emphasises that, indeed. the vin pn11ft11lt'S do not think th;tt there will be a personal trial, in which Christ would individu.tlly question each mm. :ind proceedings would be drawn up; rather, as the Apostle says, ;,, Ct!(!i(atii>nibus s11is i11dicabit1tr rm11sq11isq11e, everyone's conscience acting as witness, and the thoughts accusing or else excusing one another (Rom. 2: 15-16). "' This passage of C2 clearly takes: its inspiration from two texts in Book XX of Dt Ci11itatt Dei: XX, H and XX. 26, 3 . .a.' Now, the first of these texts of Augustine is quoted with an indication of its origins in PP V, in a passage where Eriugcna affirms that 111111sq11is1111e s111mm1 acti1m11111 et cogit,1tfo111m1 i11dex

35. C1 25 763. 36. PPV, 899 C tT. pamcubrly 900 A (Epiph.): ''tt 11wgun i1m11n crtso1111, sig11ifiw1tN munrrt~ sptrn ", Compare .also 900 D: .id lotc'w hum.rn -'UNt inttgrito11nn" with C I 25 763: 11r nult11;n riJt.irur n.zr1ir.1 s11stin11isst Jisrtnd1'111n". MottOWr, Cl 23 sars of the tinttC"r-n.iils: "n1Jl111 stttS11s torp

ERIUGENA'S ESCHATOLOCY AND HIS EXEGESIS OF ST. MATTHEW 233

erit. 0 Both C2 and PP present thus the same spiritualising and interior-izing interpretation of the Last Judgement, which will not be an external, visible process (as represented e.g. on the portals of the medieval cathedrals, or in Michelangelo's fresco in the Sistine Chapel), . but an event that will take place only inside the consciousness of every man. .

5. C2 5-1- raises an interesting question about the separation through which, in the Last Judgement, the "sheep" will be set on the right hand, and the "goats" on the left (Mt. 25:33). How should we under-stand this image? For the Apostle says that God has set Christ at his right hand, and also that he has already made us sic together with Christ in heaven (Ephes. 1:20; 2:6). The answer is short and appears rather trivial: the Lord has put us now on his right so that we do what is right; he will later sec us on his right in order that we reign with him. The opposition resolved here is that between "now" and "then", But the fomlUlation of the qum:stfo added a reason that suggests a more perplexing and delicate problem: through his Incarnation Christ has assumed omnem camtm, and all flesh h:is been crucified and raised in him; thus he, ascending and sitting at the right hand of God, 1l/1111es ad cft.Wtram co/focavit.UThe contrast that needs elucidation seems now to be that between the totality of the (hum;m) flesh redeemed by Christ, and the division of mankind-into two parts only one of which wi;l!J;>e on the right hand (i.e. saved}. Now, it is exactly this contrast that poses what has been called the !'c.entral problem" of Eriugena's escha-tology". ~J PP repeatedly reminds us that the Word of God has assumed Mam h11111a1111m 11atma111, and that therefore our humanity u11i11trsalittr et

40. According 10 Dt Ci1. Dti XX, 14, the "book"' of-Apoc. :?0:12 is not a material book, but qu.1t1lam 1-is di1i11.1: this seenu to be behind 1he neg:ition of .~tsta n.Jrr.11ion11111 attributed to the 1-iri pmdmtts in C2 53. BcsiJes, the quoution of Rom. 2:15-16 may luvc: been borrowed from Dt Cii. Dti, XX. 26, 1. On Augustine's intluen.:e, see also noc.es 21 :and 26 :and (below), note -M.

41. Sc:c: PPV, 997 B-C (also C1m111. ((, 6, 37-38). On chc: purely inttoduccory value of the: sensible: repmenutions of the: last Judgement, see E. Je:iunc::au, "le Jugement demier vu par Erigenc:", in Dt l'.irt com1nt myst.igogit. ''"""tf"phit Ju ]11gt1ntr1t Jmiitr J l'irq11t gotltiqut, Actes du Colloquc: de la Fond:ation Hardt tenu a Gc:ni:vc: du lJ :au 16 te\'Tier tm (Chilis:ition medi~~c:. III). pp. 1-8.

42. C1 54 943. 43. T. Gregory. L'cs(h3rolos;jc de Je:in Sc:oc". in Je1m Scor Eritrnt er /"/rist.,ire ,ft fa

1l1il0Npl1it', P.uis 1977. 377-.\92: p.384. R. Roques (ed.). Sec :also E. Jc:iuncau, "Le theme du ~cour (:abo\e, n.6), Ji.:?, Ji4-375, 387 tT.

Gusnvo A. PrE~IO:STE

redempr.i et liberata est; how, then, can a part of it possibly be damned?H W. e have just seen that this very problem surfaces already in C2 5.J.; but we only catch a glimpse of it, and the difficulty remains unsolved.

\Vith reference to the fate of the damned!.. let me point out that C 1 25 .issem that only the righteous are numbered by God: those who will perish are not numbered. because their esse. 1w11 aesti111.mwr and pr1> 11iliifo lrnbc11t11r. so th.u God does not kno\.,- or care about them.'" These lines look like a rough draft ot" the more definite and scholarly ide.\s sismM foc.1 et (\!11

ER.tUGEN:I.~ ESCHATOLOGY ,o\ND HIS EXEGESIS OF ST. ~IATTHEW 235

vi:rbal agreement bet\veen the two texts certainly does not seem merely casual.5" Something of these ideas of Macrobius got into the first personal doctrine of the Irish thinker in this matter, that expounded in Dill. praed. There he affirms that the hell-fire is not different from the fourth element of che world, and is therefore located not under the earth (as in the tradition) but above it (i.e. outside it, as in C2).51 This first Eriugenian theory of hell, which has much in common with the opinion quoted in C2 53. will be replaced in PP by the definitive doctrine of a non-local hell. occupying no space whatsoever in the sensible universe. 5 ~ Bi1t already Dfr. priwd. (once again in hannony with it is C2). \vhile accepting a physical (and local) fire. insinuates the possibility of a purely spirimal punishment. Speaking of the shame that the ungodly will feel on the Day of Judgement, C2 54 asks: S1.m11e, mi 11i/1il 11/teri11s p11tere11tur, ill.i Sl1/a 1erew11di11 s1![Til'r't eis ad ptie11.1111?''And in Div. pmrd. \Ve read a quite similar phrase with reg;ird to the devil: cui sua superbia s1!fliceret ad tlm1t11t11111.'4 A last observation on two omissions in C2 54 945-946 which could be signitic.int: in Mt. 25:41 the words 111i [sc. (i

236 GUSTAVO A. PIES!ONTE

7. To conclude this survey, just a few~rds.-about a passage in C 1 28. The author is dealing with the kno\vledge of God in general, but the paragraph in question has some connection with an essential chapter of Eriugena's eschatology. Expounding Mt. 11:27, Cl 28 states that "a comprehensible creature cannot comprehend the incomprehensible nature", adding that even if the Som reveals about the Father, or the Father about the Son, they however reveal 11011 q11a11tum s11.11t, sed q11am11m i/le Clli reielatur pl>test capm. ~These lines. and their context, look ~stincdy Eriugenian in their ideas and vocabulary;511 we discover in them the seminal principle of the doctrine of theoph:mies. This central theory, in its mature fonnubtion, distinguishes between the vision of God per se ipmm~ \vhich is impossible f~r any creature, and the contemplation of the divine nature dtrough certain accessible appari-tions. which bring God to our knowledge in proportion to the capacity of each one (aided by grace): i.e., through the theophanies. 5" C 1 28 makes essentially the same distinction, although without using the technical tenn ''theophany'':~ but then, most probably its author (Eriugena) had not yet read Dionysius when he wrote that homily.

III

How are we to interpret the. similarities th;1t have just been noted? Let us remark. to begin with, that more than once these correspondences concern rather unconvention;tl theses, and consequently cannot he explained as fom1itous parallelisms founded on conunonplace ideas. So, for instance. the interpretation of th~ Second Coming as a manjfestation of a Christ already present everywhere is opposed to the usual view (held. e.g., by Augustine) according to which Christ's return will be a physical descent from heaven, where he has his residence ever since his

57. Cl 28 7i8. 38. Fc:arures of Cl 28 778 tfur rtap~u in Eriugcna: che expression nat11111 i1""mprt

litruibilis: (sec PP(, 194.2 (511 8-C}, ere.), :and ilio its much less usu:i.I assod:ue,

ERIUGENA'S EsCHATOLOCY AND HIS EXEGESIS OF ST. M.\TTHEW 237

Ascension. 61 likewise, the notion of a literal dissolution of the totality of the visible world disagrees with the exegesis of Jerome, Gregory the Great, Bede, etc., who either conceive the end of the world as a mere inmutatio, not an abt11itio, or else confine the destruction to the low~r regions of the sky that surround the earth. 6~ As for the. location of hell, Columba's. poem Altus prosator, for example, summarises well the tradition by chanting: Nulli videtur dubium I in imis me itifernum:6J in the depths of the earth. not outside it.

This accord ofC1-C2 \vith distinctive Eriugenian positions might, in the abstract, give rise to diverse conjectures: e.g., that those homilies could perhaps have been influenced by Eriugena {but that would imply too late a date for them);~ or that they might be hitherto-undetected sources of his thought.1>5 But another, more exciting possibility is, of course, that John himself may have written them, or at least some part of them. Here we must recall, in the first place, the ancient testimonia about the presence among his works of a commentary on .Matthew's gospel, or tmctdt11s i11 ~\.f,11lie11111. (J, Furthermore, some external evidence is consistent with an Eriugenian authorship of, specifically, the C1-C2 homilies. For. instance, Heiric of Amcerre made use of C2 ~9c, on .Mt. 2~:29-35. in one of his own hou..ilies,just as he borrowed from Eriugena's Vi>.'C spiritualis."1 Also, some referenc~ to M1mmes in Ms. Bern, Burgerbibl. 363 (late ninth century), may relate to passages in Cl-C2.o11 Limiting myself here to the parts touching on eschatological doctrines, l can point out three examples: the first reference in Text 2 of Contreni's edition (which in my

61. Augustinc's tcai:hings on this matter in his Ep . .-id Dartlanum (Ep. 187, PL 33, 833-836) :ire summ:irised in PP V. 990 D-991 A.

62. SttJcromc, !11 Ma11l1. 24:35 (CCL, 77, 231.585 fl); Augustine, Dt Cii. Ori, XX,. 16 and 18; XX, :.?4,l; Grrg"ry tlit Grral, H.,m. 111 Evt111g., PL 16, 1216 C; ,\/.,ral., 17,9,11 (CCL 143 A, 858.18-33): Bede, In .\tart. 13.28 tT(CCL 120, 601. 261 tl): &d11li11s Sconus, In :\.f,mh. :.?4:34 (ed. B. LolSccdt. Vrt11s Litina 19, 537.17-46).

63. St'c T.O. Cbncy-G. 1vt3rkus, (l)na, Tht Earliest Pottry ef a Critic ,\f.,nastny, Edinburgh 1995, 48 and 60-61.

64. Converging indkacions tend to place C1-C2 not btcr than the 830s. 65. Such a hn1othesis, howevtr, would not 3Ccount for all the cxtem:al :md inccm31

evidence mentioned below. 66. Sec Rtdiarlits, 321-323. 67. Sec Rtrhml1rs, 339. 68. SttJohnJ. Concrcni, The lriSh in the Wes1cm urolingian Empire, in H. Lowe

(eJ ). Die Tm1 11nrl Europa im ftiili(ml .\fitttl.Jlter, Stuttg.ut 1982, 758-798; and about the prob:ible rdcrc:nces to Cl-C2 in Bern 36.3, R.td1crclics, 338-3.>9. I would like to add htrc th:it perh:ips the rwo /OH marpml notes in a ttbtcd manuscript in Irish s.:ript, the c,Jcx &trrtcrWnns ofDmden (mid-ninth centuf)"), which are quoccd by M'. l-Jcrrcn -~ l~,_,

238 GUSTAVO A. PIEMONTE

~--opiruon could bear on the words omct.a dissolvi [Ef) may point to C2 4 7 ;69 the reference in Te.".1 906-907, whc:"rC' II ThC'SS. 2:4 is quotc:"d tWi.:c:").

fc'J. S.:c: Cuntrc:"ni. 71re lriili. 714-115. Tht tint gloss thc:rt occurs n.:xt to S.:n.;us's worJs: si11t Jubii> tti.1111 '"'"""' ,fo.1f1i/t/. Compare: C2 47 IS99-900: iJl,1 rsu si>ll't11.l.1 111.ie 111t11111s 1li1i1111 (rt.wit .. 111 l'isi/1ifi,1 1111i1"trtcJ prrtrOJ11StcJ11t. Sec: Jlso :abo\"(', n. 25.

ii~. So:-: ContrC'ni. 711t fn"sl1, 788 :fl' IJ"Cf liHt rt1tli11s .fnni11i11&1 gr11trt dicam11s. DE CERTO Jllltm 11.ir 111Jst11fi11i> tJ11t111n 1i1r11d111n rst. Comp:ire C2 50 921: Et dt dit' illi> i1rcnti> Jd .i.11111/11111 1litm i/111111 CX11s J>

ERJUGENA'S EsCHATOLOGY AND HIS ExEGESIS OF ST. MATTHEW 239 -- . , ..

. -~ -.

explanatory formula habitual in PP {written once at least in the ~d ofi~t i.e. probably of Eriugena himsclf}.7' Another si~~t fcacure is a tendency to sketch a dialogue, as in C2 53 . 939: P11tas in sto1r;rdo ad11e11tu ? Absit. This inchoate dialogue finds close parallels in PP,c:g:: . ."\. P11tas11e ali11d esse lii1tna11am mer1tem .. ? A. Absit. 77 Also the apostrophe in C2 53 937: Die ergo, serve me11dax is identical in its consauction to this one in Di11. praed.: Die ergo, G.78 Finally, I would like to highlight here a par:igraph in C2 47 899, which in its lexicon, rhetorical techniques (alliteration. rhyme). and specific use of two co-ordinate verbs. decipit ... et deludit, offers a remax:kable counterpan to a. passage in PP IV about a completely different subject. 79 As for the method, let me refer at least to the short reasoning used in C2 51 928 to show that the concept infideles has a wider extension than that of lrypocritae,ao a

75. E.g. Cl 30 790: .\"ec mi/Ii tlicas recalls PP III. 286.30 (733 c): Et ne tlitas; 'also PP ll. 146.6 (590 B): Et 11t 111i/1i "PP"nas. Other examples in Rtthtirlm, 331.

76. See PP V, IJ16 B: Passi1111ts .mttm dic11"; 919 C; in PP IV, 158.2-3 (808 B), Ct>HSe J11t11tia auttm 1lico belongs to an :iddition ofi' in ,\IS. R.tims 875: see SUi XIII. 156, app. crit.

77. PP IV. 62.31 lf(768 ,\-B).Compare also PP I, 186.'.7 lf(508 A:B) with C2 48 IJ04: Et q11i.i? Put.is idt11 Ji.W.,/11111 > .ibsit, std

i8. Dia'. pr.itd . 2.161: see :ilso PP IV. 58.28 (766 C).A v:ariant is Dk i1a.z11t, in PP I, 164.34 (499 B). etc.

79. C2 47 899, on Mt. 24:1 (the buildings of the Temple) is here contionted '"ith PP IV, 250.28 IT(850 .'\-0), on Gen. 3:14 (the curse upon the serpent): _ -,

CH7 PPIV .~ - : Std q11am pratst.lt ~rittas !i.J.-rnri11111 (250.28) ips.u JW! simplius , , .. _ .

~:?~::fi ::J::zi~~~0+ 1ltl11clit .. 1ltcipit animastJ11t dtl11dit _. ,. d.. :.. -

.Ji3llacibusqut JZ!.!e.ntasiis .fi!1s11nim . ~ ': _ - 11irt11t11111 Jl!ruiL 1nortisqut ~ > . attmiat ttntbris Wfimf!.,.. .. -

ltgnn mtilm c11rrupi.L . '"11ttmp!iJ. (252. l 9) qua h11minnn tltctptuin CitlfL mxi! f tftlli!Ji., rrtltti!!J., 111/it!Y!j, ~:

... mmfl!i.

,:::_ ' .....

The sq.iisdc resemblances between these cwo texts, which dc::il \\"ith subjects very diswic &om nch other, suggest. ~cher dwt a direct inJJucace, the authorship ofche same -writer, using in both cerain f.avourite words and rhetorical devices.

80. C 1 51 9~8: Ji "mntt 'l"idnn l1yprit~ infidtln 111111, n.m t.unm "'""a i1yiJtln l1yprit.u 111nt. 1ce niim ~11tilts i'!JiJtlts 'lllidan s11nt, l1ypIit.it autnn,,.,,. 11111t . Hyprit.N aurmt su11t luJ.zti tt 11.mnit:i . lfro1n the \iewpoinc ofche contents .:omp.ue this Jhision with dudn Ho1111. XXJ, 21.) ....

. .

240 . GUSTA.VO A... PIEMONTE

reasoning which is a direct applicmon to exegesis of .the dialectical procedures so recommended in Div_ praed.; indeed, some passages of the latter on the conversion of certain umversal affirmative propositions are clearly parallel, in their logical fOrm, to the lines of C2 51 just mentioned. is The sources that appear to have been used (implicitly or anonymously) in C'.? are also at le~ compatible with an attribution to Eriugena. The Pseudo-Dionysius. or Ma.ximus the . Confessor are not found among them, but on the other hand other influences typical of Eriugena 's writings are indeed disce.mible. Martian us Capella, e.g., seems to have inspired112 the paragraph where the sudden advent of Christ is compared with the diffusion of the sunbeams, 3J or the description of a court of justice, image of the hea"enly tribunal.! .. Another important source of Eriugena, Marius VictoriJius, ~5 has probably supplied C2 with two central ideas,"' viz. that all matC%ia.l things, even the highest ones, are liable to destruction, r. and that cmmis caro has been assumed and redeemed by Christ.KiJ In various instances the very passage of a source that seems to

81. Sc:c e.g. Di1. pratJ. 8, 45 tf(cxiensionofthc o:oncepts.ruticmalis 1111/11111.is :md /,,.,,,.,); 13. 60 ff' (rd:uions ~twccn pr.itclnti1Wli :an.:! Jti.filii).

8:?. There arc Ill C2 still other uao:cs "probable o:onnco:rions ,,;th M. C:apell.i: e.g. IX 1111priis, 16. :?:?. :and .i1111,1r. 25. l( it: e>pNailr 26, 8 tt show o:orrcsrondcno:cs with C:? 51) 9:?1. / ..... -............,

1\3. Cqmparc Dt{mpriiJ. 33. :?) tf. on dw.mival of the Sun (this r:assagc has also intlu-cno:cJ th.f beginning ofjohn's poe~1 .iuf.ur !icftrt.tt), :and the o:ommcntiry in At11111t 46, 28 tf. in.~artio:ul.ir 4i, 11-12: mir.ibilt111 r.idi.1n1111 ttftritt1tnt1 pn111.in1111 si111ilit11cli11t imimi.ir. wi1h Cl 49b 917, ~spci:i3ll)": 1rlcKt111 c1J1'C'tlllllfl Cliristi dSltn.ltre 1'11ft11s,./i1lg11ris si111iliruJi11t111 . intM111.~t. .. - . , ,: . ::, . . . < . - .

84. Compare ~ 1111ptiis, 219. 4 tF. in particular: ~tn llCies tJrdi11c1tt1 cimsist.ir. with C2 5-1 941, i~ pai-cicubr: Hirrc iriJe c1jlicfailtJ .ttirs 11rtli1wtt CtJnJist11nt (.ltits, :atncrit from Mignc, is found in MS . Torino. Bibi. S.c. F.11.19 (~/l()da c.), C. 159r). Sec also PP V. 924 C: 111 11

have silently inspired C2 is explicitly quoted:.~ a recognised Eriugenian work. I have mentioned above a few such. cases conceming texts of Augustine, Epiphanius and Macrobius,89 and there are still other analogous examples in Cl-C2.90 Such a situation favours the hypothesis of one and the same author resorting on different occasions to the same familiar sources.

The dit;ferences in points of doctrine or of style which,, on the other hand, distinguish Cl-C2 from, in particular, the Penpl1yseon, can often be accounted for by assuming chat the Homilies on Matthew are early productions. Actually, some traits of C1-C2 that might look un-Eriugenian are shared by an undoubtedly authentic work prior to PP, the treatise on predestination; for example the absence of reference to the '''rpus areopagiticum.'11 In other words, .those differences can often be precious traces of a doctrinal and literary evolution of the Irish thinker, a development process. which does not seem at all unlikely if, as certain features in Cl-C2 indicate, they are separated from his mature works by perhaps thirty years, and probably belong to a very early period in John's career, preceding all or almost all of his acknowledged works. "2

IV. Conclusion

It might be said that the eschatology of the Homilies on Matthew resembles that of PP as a portrait of a man in his youth resembles a picture of the same man in his adult years:"~ certain features are identical but others have more or less changed, so that a careful examination may be

88. Secabove, [, 5, andcompareVictorinus, Jn Cal. 6:H, CSEl.83, 2. p. 171.15-17: ut onrnis emu in illo cnidfi...:a sit. Also Adv. Ar .. Ill, 3, 30 tT. - 89. See above, I, 3; I, .J; I. 6.

90. For e.lC2lllple a passage ofjeron1e 111 ,\f.Jttl1. silentlr quoted :md glossed in Cl 30 790-791 is the ~me one that tw been used (but here also without idenrification) in C4ntr. 9, H~11 (IV, 1 Traubt), 62 ff(see my An111acicmrs, X. 38).

91. The Cl11ssu Ji11inu l1ist11riat and the .-l1111ot. likev.ise do not menrion the Pseudo-Oionysius.

92. About the place ofC1-C2 in the chronology ofEriugena's works, see Rtchtrrl1ts, 3.JO-J .. n. Much of what is said in the Jnuoduction to JJ. Concrcni and P. O"Neill's edition of the Gloss.x Ji11i1i.w l1istori.Jt, Firenze l 997, 72-84, about die early c:arccr of John Scomu, seems relevant to the dating of the Tracrc111u in ,\l.JtMalm.

93. J. Marenbon, .. John Sconus :and Carolingian Theology" (abo\e n. 8), h:u rightly cmplu.sised the iriternt of the links between Eriugena"s nrlier and bier writings, :and between Eriugcna and his contemporarin, for the unJ.:nu.nJing uf his work. I believe thn the scudy of C 1-C:? c:m :a.h"2nce our knowledge of both of those rebrionships .

...... . "'!--.:.-+ !"' ~.---- ......... . . . - h .- ... - .....

--"'

------------.---..,._..~---~----- -

242 GUSTAVO A. PIEMONTE

necessary in order to perceive :and interpret the relation between the two images. Similarly some characteristic Eriugenian themes are clearly .. if briefly, present in Cl-C2 {Orist's Advent as a revelation of hiddlen ubiquity; the destruction of the whole visible world; the Last Judgement as a menu! event). Others au only suggested or implied (the rok of nature in the resurrection, the question about the compatibility of die ultimate destiny of sinners with the universality ofChrist's redemption, the limitations on the vision of God). Finally, the purely psychologiC:21 punishment of the damned, 'Which in C2 is only insinuated as a vague possibility, becomes in PP a rtliek 145b (Codex &emeriamis) Reims, Bibliothequt ;.\.11mici'palt 875 (hand i1) Torino, Bibliota Nazionalt F.//.19

94. C:? 49a 906-908. 95. Sec e.g. PPV, 1019 A-,1020A: on the prtti11s.a nwrs sanctonim, see PPV, 891 B898

C (:also 926 B-D).