Falluomini on The Gothic Version of the Gospels and the Pauline Epistles

I have just received Carla Falluomini’s fine monograph on The Gothic Version of the Gospels and the Pauline Epistles: Cultural Background, Transmission and Character published by De Gruyter in the ANTF series (vol. 46), edited by D. C. Parker and Holger Strutwolf.

In the first chapter, “Wulfila and his context,” Falluomini re-examines the historical and cultural context of the Gothic version. She concludes that “the territories in which Wulfila lived, north and south of the Lower Danube, were characterised by the coexistence of several cultures and languages” which is reflected in “Wulfila’s triangual education, in his alphabet devised on the basis of Greek and Latin letters and runes, and in the vocabulary of his version, which includes Greek and Latin terms.” The Behind his translation lay both a missionary purpose, as well as an attempt to elevate Gothic to the rank of other languages, which in extension would reinforce the ethnic and religious identity of his people from the mid-fourth century and later.

The second chapter deals with the witnesses to the version. For the Gospels: Codex Argenteus, the Ambrosianus C, the Gissensis; For the Pauline Epistles (excl. Hebrews): Codex Carolinus, Ambrosianus A+ and Ambrosianus B. In addition, a few other witnesses testify to the circulation and usage of the version:  the tablet of Hács-Béndekpuszta (now lost), the recently discovered Codex Bononiensis (see our earlier reports here and here), the Gotica Vindobonensia in Gothic script and the Gotica Parisina in Latin script.

Falluomini concludes that Codex Argenteus is an example of a high class of book production (indeed, Sweden’s foremost book treasure). The elegant bilingual Carolinus and Gissensis are less accurate in their writing, but, nevertheless, are also the products of well organized scriptoria. Argenteus, Carolinus and Ambrosianus A+ share a number of paleographical innovations. Falluomini thinks Ravenna is the most probable place for their production.

The codicological analysis in chapter three shows, among other things, that the Gothic MSS were used in liturgy. On the other hand, the existence of glossed MSS (Argenteus and Ambrosianus A+) indicates that the biblical text was also read and used outside of liturgical contexts (this is mentioned in ch. 2). Further, Falluomini identifies a close relationship between Gothic and Latin scribes, suggesting that there were scriptoria “where Goths and Romans worked side by side.”

The fourth chapter deals with linguistic and stylistic features. First of all, the Gothic version is very literal, following a Greek (lost) Vorlage. Thus, it is often possible to determine the underlying Greek text; a good thing for textual criticism. At the same time, Wulfila tried to be intelligible to his audience. However, some of his loan words or creations may have been difficult to understand for the Goths, but they “may have found a kind of justification in the aura of mystery surrounding the new cult.” It is also possible, Falluomini adds, that the translation formed a Sondersprache which was different lexically and syntactically from the common Gothic language. The presence of glosses in Gothic MSS may reflect that some words were obsolete. On the other hand, the sixth century Codex Bononiensis, probably part of a sermon or liturgical prayer, contains citations from the Gothic version suggesting that the Wulfilian Gothic was understood and in use.

In the fifth chapter, the author discusses the Greek Vorlage and the Gothic textual transmission. A large part of this chapter reviews the history of research in this area. The Gothic text agrees primarily with the Byzantine text type. Some readings, however, agree with the “Western” or Alexandrian texts. The “Western” readings may either have been present in Wulfila’s Greek Vorlage, or, as the dominant theory suggests, they entered into the version during its transmission through a revision on the basis of the Latin version(s). The role of the Latin version(s) in the Gothic transmission is a complex problem. Falluomini discusses three possibilities: (1) Wulfila used a Latin model in addition to a Greek Vorlage; (2) the Gothic text underwent a double process of Latinisation (first at the time of translation, and subsequently in the west during the copying of Gothic MSS; (3) the original translation was subject to Latin influence only in the western milieu.

Falluomini rejects the hypothesis that all the non-Byzantine readings are post-Wulfilian. However, some changes did occur in the subsequent transmission, typical to scribal activity (rather than redaction): additions/omissions of words, insertion of marginal annotations and harmonisation to parallel passages. Further, she concludes that there is nothing that contradicts the possibility that Wulfila used a Latin exemplar in addition to the Greek Vorlage, “as an aid to render some difficult expressions of the Greek text, particularly in the Epistles.”

In the sixth chapter, the author goes on to discuss the readings of the Gothic version in relation to the Byzantine text and offers her own textual analysis . If the Byzantine text is seen as a slowly developing tradition (faster in the Gospels than in the Pauline Epistles), then the non-Byzantine readings of the Gothic versions may be interpreted as conservative elements “reflecting a mid-fourth century Greek text in which the process of standardization was still far away.” This is an important conclusion which has implications for the future study of the Byzantine text.

Among other things, Falluomini’s textual analysis lists 44/116 (38%) non-Byzantine readings in Matthew and 147/335 (44%) non-Byzantine readings in John. The greatest part of these readings are shared with “Western” witnesses. On the other hand, only 8/116 (7%) of the readings in Matthew and 19/335 (6%) of the readings in John are supported exlusively by “Western” witnesses. In Romans there are 63/120 (53%) non-Byzantine readings and 40/82 (49%) in Galatians. Further, there are 14/120 (12%) readings in Romans attested only by “Western” witnesses, and 17/82 (21%) in Galatians.

Falluomini suggests that the following readings can be attributed to Wulfila: (1) readings supported by Byzantine MSS; (2) non-Byzantine readings which are not “Western” (and therefore not suspected to reflect Latinisation); (3) non-Byzantine readings supported not only by “Western” witnesses. Thus, doubts remain when Gothic readings agree only with Latin witnesses, with or without the support of Greek “Western” witnesses (D F G). Further, she concludes that, since the Gothic version is so literal, it is particularly valuable for tracing the history of the oldest stage of the Byzantine text.

There are two appendices. Appendix I lists all significant readings of the Gothic Gospels of Matthew and John, and in Romans and Galatians. Appendix II contains a table of the main codicological features of the Gothic MSS; information about the Long Ending of Mark; and a transcription of the so-called praefatio to the Codex Brixianus.

The author is to be congratulated for this fine work!

Falluomini on the New Gothic Fragment

Some time ago, Peter Head blogged about a recent discovery of new fragments of the Gothic Bible. He referred to Carla Falluomini, who states in the new edition of The Text of the New Testament in Contemporary Research that: “no new parts of the Gothic Bible have been found that would have attracted attention to this branch of the biblical tradition” (p. 331). So this discovery, albeit of a fragment, is highly significant. In fact, it is significant as part of the few literary remains of the Gothic language in general.

Professors Rosa Bianca Finazzi and Paola Tornaghi of The Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore in Milan who made the fantastic discovery of the two folios dated to the 6th-century named it Gothica Bononiensia, since it was found in the Basilica of San Petronio in Bologna. They published a complete analysis including transcription of the text and images in “Gothica Bononiensia. Analisi linguistica e filologia di un nuovo documento,” Aevum 87 (2013): 113-155 (the image below is taken from this article, p. 152). Thanks to Irmengard Rauch from Berkeley University, an English translation is available in Interdisciplinary Journal for Germanic and Semiotic Analysis 19, 2 (2014): 1-56. Moreover, they have published another article focusing on the linguistic significance of the new finding: “Alcune riflessioni sul palinsesto gotico-latino di Bologna,” in Carla Falluomini ed., Intorno alle Saghe Norrene, Edizioni dell’Orso (Alessandria, 2014), 229-265. More on the Gothica Bononiensia here.

In the guestpost below, Carla Falluomini (University of Turin) offers further comments on the new fragment. She has specialized on the Gothic version and her new book The Gothic Version of the Gospels and Pauline Epistles is soon to be published in the ANTF series (ANTF 46) by De Gruyter. Carla was also a referee in the nomination process for the Gothic Codex Argenteus (the “Silver Bible”) to be included in the UNESCO’s Memory of the World Register (which happened in 2011). See my blogpost on that topic and the Gothic version in general here.

A New Gothic Fragment
The Gothic fragment discovered recently in Bologna (where it is preserved, in the Archivio della Fabbriceria della Basilica di San Petronio, Cart. 716/1, n°1; olim Cart. 353, cam. n°3) offers for the first time parts of an independent – i.e. non-translated – text, probably part of a sermon or liturgical prayer (there are markers of orality, which suggest that it was read in front of an audience). The main topic of the text is the power of God (the author offers some exempla of salvation, e.g. of the three Hebrews in the furnace, of Noah, etc. ). The manuscript may be dated in the first third/half of the sixth century, judging by the similarities with the other Gothic manuscripts. Some codicological divergences between this fragment and the Gothic manuscripts certainly produced in Ravenna suggest that the place of its production may be different. Verona, another important centre of Gothic power, might be a possible alternative. The script is the ‘sloping uncial’, a script used for glosses and texts of ‘everyday use’, not the elegant and regular script of the Codex Argenteus.

The place and period of the composition of the text is unknown but the most probable guess is that it was produced in North Italy, in the first part of the sixth century (it seems unlikely that this kind of text was brought from Moesia to Italy by Theoderic the Great and/or the Gothic clergy). The author is unknown (it is not impossible that the author coincides with the scribe). He was certainly a (Homean) priest, very expert in the Holy Scriptures. The text transmits several citations from the Old and New Testament, marked in the link margin by a horizontal sign (not a diplé as usual in the Gothic manuscripts). Some of these citations – e.g. from the Psalms, Acts and 1 Peter – are not preserved in the extant parts of the Gothic Bible, which is transmitted in a fragmentary form.

The text of the citations derives from the Wulfilian tradition. It agrees perfectly with the text of the manuscripts of the Gothic Bible (only one deviation, which is not relevant to textual criticism). Furthermore, the author uses the particular form Nauel ‘Noah’, attested in the Gothic biblical tradition. Some Gothic words are attested for the first time, together with the title of the Acts (here in dative: tojam ‘deeds’).

Update (2015-01-21): I have added a paragraph about the initial discovery of the new Gothic MS by Professors Rosa Bianca Finazzi and Paola Tornaghi (TW).