Classical Education and Coptic Monks of the Sixth Century:

What the Text-based Homilies of Rufus of Shotep Reveal about Sixth Century Monasticism in
Upper Egypt

At the Coptic Congress of 1996, Professor Raffaella Cribiore made the observation that the
writings of some Coptic authors betray much familiarity with the style of the Second Sophistic
movement and the rules of rhetorical composition well known to the golden age of Patristic
literature. She observed further: Later on, at the time of the patriarch Damianus, and even
after the Arab conquest, a group of writers revived such rhetorical style in their Coptic literary
production. It is likely that all these writers became well-acquainted with the Patristic literature
and with a rhetorical education that apparently only the Greek schools could offer.1 In a
footnote she mentioned John of Shmun and the panegyric of Macarius of Tkow attributed to
Dioscorus. To this group of authors should be added Constantine of Assiut, Stephen of Hnes
and now Rufus of Shotep, whose homilies had not yet been published in 1996.2
Rufus was the bishop of Shotep (known as Hypselis in Greek) in Upper Egypt, a metropolis
near Lycopolis, in the late sixth century. His surviving works are text-based homilies in Sahidic.
Most of the sermons that we have from this period are by or attributed to bishops. However, by
the end of the fourth century or early fifth century, most of the bishops were drawn from the
monasteries.3 Therefore the sermons or homilies produced by bishops are indirect evidence of
the influence of classical paideia on early Egyptian monasticism. All of the authors mentioned
so far were monks.
The text-based homily had been established as a distinct literary genre in Greek at least since
the time of Origen. In any case, his text-based homilies based on lectio continua are the oldest
surviving examples.4 By "text-based homily" is intended a sermon that offers a series of
1 R. Cribiore, "Greek and Coptic Education in Late Antique Egypt,", in gypten und Nubien in sptantiker und
christlicher Zeit: Akten des 6. Internationalen Koptologenkongresses, Mnster, 20.-26. Juli 1996, ed. S. Emmel, M.
Krause, S.G. Richter, S. Schaten. Wiesbaden: Reichert, 1999, p. 281.
2 J. Mark Sheridan, Rufus of Shotep: homilies on the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. Roma: CIM, 1998. For an
appraisal of the rhetorical skills of Constantine of Assiut and Stephen of Hnes, see M. Sheridan, The Encomium
in Coptic Sermons of the Late Sixth Century in Christianity in Egypt: Literary Production and Intellectual
Trends. Studies in Honor of Tito Orlandi, edited by Paola Buzi and Alberto Camplani (Studia Ephemeridis
Augustinianum 125), Roma, Istituto Patristico Augustinianum, 2011.
3 Mariachiara Giorda, Monachesimo e istituzioni ecclesiastiche in Egitto: alcuni casi di interazione e integrazione.
Bologna: EDB, 2010, pp. 112-116.
4 F. Siegert has argued on the basis of a few Jewish text-based homilies preserved in Armenian that the
praxis/genre was common to Jews and Christians. It is far from clear that there is any continuity between the
Jewish practice and the Christian literary genre first found with Origen. This is not to deny the commonly accepted
notion that the Christian liturgy of the word is rooted in Jewish synagogal practice. See F. Siegert, From Prophecy
to Preaching. A Search for the Origins of the Christian Homily, The Journal of Theological Studies 54, no. 2
(2003): 735738.

comments or explanations following the sequence of a Scriptural reading that has taken place. It
is to be distinguished from a thematic or panegyrical sermon. The thematic homily could be
based on a Scriptural text, but does not follow the sequence of verses in its development.5
In general Origen's homilies follow the traditional division of a public discourse into
prologue, body and conclusion.6 To introduce the first verse to be commented on, he may begin
with a general idea, or the citation of a work, or a story that somehow relates to the text that
will follow. The body of the homily is constituted by a series of quotations from the reading
followed by interpretations. The same text may be quoted several times if different parts of it
are to be explained successively or if a series of explanations is to be offered. In these homilies
the moral and paraenetic tone is reduced and concentrated at the end. Origen always concludes
his homilies with the same doxology borrowed from 1 Pet 4:11: "To whom be the power and
the glory for ever and ever. Amen."7 Sometimes this is simply attached to the explanation of the
last verse cited but often it is preceded by a more elaborate conclusion.
Different styles were considered appropriate for a panegyrical sermon and for a homily. In
the ancient world only Jewish celebration, as it took place in the synagogues (not in the
temple), and Christian religious celebrations required rhetorical activity. "Ancient religious celebrations normally kept worship separate from teaching."8 However, this separation did not exclude the possibility of religious panegyric or speeches on religious matters before a public assembly or on the occasion of a festival. The gods could be the subject of an encomium and such
speeches required the participation of professional speakers. There was also religious discourse
on a colloquial level suited for the classroom or private gatherings, such as that developed by
some philosophers. These two styles or categories found their Jewish and Christian counterparts
in the panegyrical sermon and the homily, both of which also corresponded to different occasions and audiences. Normally the style appropriate to the panegyrical sermon was not seen as
fitting for a homily, that is, an explanation of texts that had been read in the assembly, Jewish or
5 T. Steiger, "Homilie" in Historisches Wrterbuch der Rhetorik (ed. Gert Ueding; Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche
Buchgesellschaft, 1996) 3:1510: "Thematische H. heit eine Predigt, wenn sie lediglich den inhaltlichen
Grundgedanken des Schrifttextes oder ein dort angesprochenes Thema aufgreift, um dieses in freier Weise
anzuwenden, ohne jedoch dem logischen Duktus der Textstelle zu folgen." On the history of the homily see M.
Sachot, "Homilie" in Reallexikon fr Antike und Christentum (Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1994) 16:148-175.
6 For a more detailed analysis of the structure of Origen's homilies, see P. Nautin, ed., Origne: Homlies sur
Jrmie (SC 232; Paris: Editions du Cerf, 1976), 123-131. What follows here is a summary of the analysis offered
by Nautin.
7 On the doxologies and the variant forms that occur in the translations by Rufinus, see H. Crouzel, "Les
doxologies finales des homlies d'Orignes selon le texte grec et les versions latines" Augustinianum(1980): 95107.
8 Folker Siegert, "Homily and Panegyrical Sermon" in Handbook of Classical Rhetoric in the Hellenistic Period
330 B.C. - A.D. 400, ed. Stanley E. Porter, Leiden 1997, 421.

Christian. A homily has also been defined as an address to an audience with which the speaker
is familiar.9 It is characterized by a conversational, colloquial style. That is certainly true of the
homilies of Origen and Chrysostom, the two Greek authors from whom we have preserved the
largest corpus of homilies in antiquity. The style appropriate for homilies was supposedly unadormed.10
Conversely the colloquial style was not seen as fitting for more formal occasions and social
settings. These required the grand or high style that had been developed in the Greek discourse
(logos). Public communication required high artistic skills to which a sophisticated urban public
might well be accustomed. Thus the style suitable for an explanation of the readings was not
sufficient for the celebration of an important feast or the annual commemoration of a saint or
martyr. It should be noted that the grand style did not necessarily mean an ornate or Asianic
style, though this might be employed and some Coptic encomia or panegyrical sermons show
its influence.11
Attention has been called to the fact that Origen made use in his homilies of at least one
classical rhetorical figure, that of the chreia, included traditionally among the progymasmata.12
Karen Jo Torjesen has observed that The prefaces to the exegetical sermons bear the closest
resemblance to the rhetorical exercises for interpreting a pithy saying or anecdote attributed to
some eminent personage. She also notes that the transposition of this rhetorical practice from
the hellenistic civic culture into Christian religious culture resulted in significant modifications.
First of all, the chreia citation is now from the Scriptures, not from the passage to be explained
in the homily, but from another passage of Scripture, through which Origen is able to state the
thesis of the homily. For example the thesis of the first homily on Jeremiah is stated through the
citation of Jonah 3:4, God is quick to anger and slow to punish those who merit punishment.
9 Siegert 1997: 441.
10 T. Steiger, "Homilie" Historisches Wrterbuch der Rhetorik (ed. Gert Ueding; Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche
Buchgesellschaft, 1996) 3:1512: "Schlielich findet sich seit dem 4. Jh. n. Chr. die auch terminologisch saubere
Unterscheidung zwischen der homila als Schriftpredigt einerseits and dem logos, lgos als rhetorisch gestaltetem
Vortrag andererseits."
11 The term asianismus has been employed, inter alia, to designate a style using short rhythmic phrases and
melodious assonances, often arranged in parallel. However, the term, though found in antiquity in a polemical
context opposing asianic to attic style, is not unproblematic. It was questioned by Willamowitz-Mllendorff
already in 1900. See J. Adamietz, "Asianismus" Historisches Wrterbuch der Rhetorik ( Darmstadt:
Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1998) 1:1114-1120 and Tim Whitmarsh, The Second Sophistic. Cambridge;
New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011. A similar critique has been made recently of the notion "second
Sophistic." See A. Toresillas, "Sophistik" Historisches Wrterbuch der Rhetorik (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche
Buchgesellschaft, 1998) 8:990-1027.
12 George A. Kennedy, Progymnasmata: Greek textbooks of prose composition and rhetoric. Atlanta: Society of
Biblical Literature, 2003. Chreia is found in all four of the treatises reproduced by Kennedy: Theon, Hermogenes,
Apthonius and Nicolaus. For more on the classical use of Chreia, see Ronald F Hock and Edward N. ONeil. The
Chreia in Ancient Rhetoric. Volume I, Volume I,. Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1986.

The thesis for the second homily is introduced through the citation of Wis 1:13-14, God did
not create death, nor does he take pleasure in the death of the living.13 The chreia was
normally developed through several steps: thesis, example, citation, analogy, argument from the
contrary and exhortation. The Christianized chreia drew on examples from Scripture for these
steps as well as for the statement of the thesis.
The homilies of Rufus of Shotep, although they are structured as text-based homilies, also
show considerable influence of traditional Greek rhetorical practices, indeed more so than do
those of Origen. None of these homilies has survived completely intact, but enough has
survived to be able to identify various rhetorical elements. The first of these to be noted here is
the use of the Christianized chreia as an introduction or preface to the homilies. Unfortunately
the superscription and beginning of the first homily on the Gospel of Matthew are missing. The
surviving text begins with the following passage:
pme gar n+tsarx+ tefsn+te pe pjwhm+ peflwby pe ptwlm+ pme de n+tof
mp+_n+i+_k+on nouteimine an pe . ptbbo pe pefroouy pouop pe pefjwk ebol.
oupi nagapH pe pefaspasmos . peukto eneuerHu14 pe tmr+re n+tirHnH
pai: de efyannau eteTuCH easpira hntpistis hentesmn+tkoui easji
nnesmelos hentegkratia eassa fnamerits n+ciplogos etonh fnajwh
mpekmeeue n+fsokk+ ehoun eume n+noute .
auw hinai ekyanji n+tefkoinwnia n+kbwk nm+maf hn+m+mustHrion eqHp kna
wy ebol hwwk nqe nteinumPH n+ekklHsiastikH jeYjn+tjHu anok
hentefagapH tai etenylHl etreouon nim jpos naf n+fnouje ebol
n+tepiqumia ethoou ntepswma n+f+merepefnumPios etonh pswtHr E
jeeretefTuCH naywpe nouei hwws hnneiyeere yHm etouHh n+saneuybeer
nai: etraye nmmas erepnumPios najits ehoun epefkoitwn . hmptresjoos
je apero jit anok ehoun epeftamion . pejaf jetnnatelHlce
n+teneuPrane nhHte15
As for the love of the flesh, its foundation is uncleanness; its consummation is defilement.
Spiritual love, on the other hand, is not like this sort. Purity is its concern; sanctity is its end. A
kiss of (Christian) love is its greeting. Their turning to one another is the bond of peace.
As for Him, if he sees the soul, having been tried [in the faith] from its youth, having kept its
members in self-control, having become beautiful, the living Word will love her, he will touch
13 K.J. Torjesen, Influence of Rhetoric on Origen's Old Testament Homilies in G. Dorival and A. Le Boulluec.
Origeniana Sexta: Origne et La Bible: Actes Du Colloquium Origenianum Sextum, Chantilly, 30 Aot-3
Septembre 1993. Leuven University Press: Peeters, 1995, 13-25.

14 The text published in Sheridan 1998: 61 has been corrected here "Ex Codice Marciano Orientali 193 (10)
Fragm. XX, fol. 1" (See E. Lucchesi, "Feuillets dits non identifis du Commentaire sur l'vangile de Matthieu
attribu Rufus di Chotep" Le Muson 115 [2002]), 270), and from the printer's proofs left by Mingarelli:
Mingarelli, Giovanni Luigi. Aegyptorum codicum reliquiae Venetiis in Bibliotheca Naniana asservatae Fasc. 3
Fasc. 3. Boneniae, 1785. The date, however, cannot be correct, but must have been left uncorrected from the
publication of the previous fascicle. Copies are to be found in Venice, Berlin and Cambridge, MA.
15 The indications of defective and/or restored text have been omitted in order to facilitate the reading. For these
the reader is referred to the original edition (Sheridan 1998).

your mind and draw you into divine love.

Afterwards, if you accept his fellowship and enter with him into the hidden mysteries, you also
will cry out like this ecclesial bride "I am wounded from his love" (Cant 5:8). It is this that we
pray everyone might bring forth to him, and cast out the evil desire of the body and love his living
bridegroom, the savior Jesus, so that his soul also may become one among those maidens (cf.
Cant 1:3-4) who follow after their friend. It is these who rejoice with her when the bridegroom is
about to take her into his bedroom. When she said "the king has taken me indeed into his inner
room," he said, "We will exult and rejoice in you" (Cant 1:4). 16

Here the chreia citation is provided by the texts from the Canticle to introduce the theme of
initiation into hidden mysteries and intimacy with the Lord. This indicates the kind of
interpretation that Rufus will be offering. He then cites the superscription to the Gospel
beginning with his typical phrase I hear then:

Yswtm+

ce erof jepjwwme mpejpo nE peF . fsmamaat n+cipnoute

ppantokratwr peiwt m+penjoeis E peF pai: entafaan nm+pya
etrenmeyttswye mpeieuaggelion nkatamaqaios n+tenkwtf ebol hmpehrHre
n+tiwte mpehrHton tai eteretenkoui: n+tapro naeyfits eanji ehoun
enti:hmef mpetn+nous eywpe atmaau etn+hounounoi:n+ kwt m+pentaujitf nas
ehoun n+oukwt enanouf trefywpe nnerwou mn+nrwme eumton
I hear then: "The book of the generation of Jesus the Christ" (Matt 1:1). Blessed be God, the
almighty, the father of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is He who has made us worthy to search out the
field of this Gospel according to Matthew and to gather from the flower the dew of the text. It is
this that our little mouths will be able to carry, which we have taken into the hives of your minds
when the mother that is within intelligence has built that which has been brought into her into a
fair dwelling to become "for kings and (common) men for health" (Prov 6:8a-b LXX). 17

We have here a rather elaborate synkrisis in which the preacher compares himself to a bee
searching for nectar in the flowers of a field to take back to the beehive.18 The bee is inspired by
Proverbs 6:8a-b, which is partially cited. The Gospel is the field and the hidden meanings are
described as the dew of the text, which the preacher promises to extract and bring to the
minds of the hearers, which are compared with the hives in which the queen bee dwells as
within the nous or mind. The use of the bee in a synkrisis is rather common in antiquity and
there are numerous examples of Christian usage prior to Rufus, including Basil, Didymus, John
Chrysostom and Cyril of Alexandria.19 This is the only example, however, that I have found in
16 The texts are cited here from Sheridan 1998: 61 (text), 127 (translation).
17 Sheridan 1998: 61-62 (text), 127-128 (translation).
18 On the use of synkrisis in Coptic encomia, see Sheridan 2011: passim.
19 For examples, see Sheridan 1998: 270-273. Basil of Caesarea uses the model of the wise bee as an example of
how to draw what is useful from ancient writings. See Mario Naldini, Basilio di Cesarea: Discorso ai giovani =
Oratio ad adolescentes. Bologna: EDB, 2005, IV, 8-10 (pp. 93-95). Naldini observes that this similitude circulated
among philosophers like a proverb. See pp. 166-167. Gregory of Nyssa offers another example of Christian usage
in Homily 9 of his Homilies on the Song of Songs, citing also Prov 6:8. See Gregory of Nyssa, tr. R.A. Norris.
Homilies on the Song of Songs. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2012, pp. 281-285.

which the preacher is the bee and the nectar refers to esoteric meanings.20
This passage is followed by a paraphrase that continues the theme of hidden meanings:

tai

ce te qe ntafYhmot nan ncipenjoeis jintarCH m+peuaggelion

eanmouyt n+tefepigraPH yantenpwh ehrai: emmeros etouroeis eroou
m+pjoeis ntswye nai: etemereouon nim eycmcom emoytou eimHtei
neklHronomos m+pjoeis
Thus therefore has our Lord been gracious to us from the beginning of the gospel, when we have
examined its superscription, until we reach the places which are being watched over by the Lord
of the country. It is these that no one is able to search out except the heirs of the Lord. 21

The paraphrase is followed in turn by a series of examples drawn from Scripture to illustrate the
theme of hidden places to which only the heirs of the Lord have access:
ai:swtm+ gar erof efnakaprwme hmpparadisos efhwn etootf etrefouwm
ebol hnyHn nim ethmpparadisos pyHn de esouHnppetnanouf mn+ppeqoou
etrefhareh erof etm+ouwm ebol n+hHtf
auw enefmouh entefmn+takritos mnnsws de nterefparaba ntentolH
aftrepeCairoubimmn+tsHfe nsat eroeis etehiH mpyHn mpwnh jennefouwm
ebol n+hHtf n+fwnh hn+teiparabasis
palin on Yswtm erof hm+pkwt mpHi: hn+i:ezekiHl efnouje ebol nhentopos
etreouon nim bwk ehoun eroou netouaab de n+toou n+netouaab parCiereus
m+mate pe yafbwk ehoun eroou
tpulH ethipeiHbt tai: etemereymmo bwk ehoun eros H nseei ebol nhHts
eimHtei: petnaouwm mpefoeik n+hHts mauaaf n+fei ebol2
For I heard him as he was about to place the man in Paradise commanding him "to eat of every
tree which was in Paradise but to take care not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and
evil" (Gen 2:16-17).
And when he was full of confusion after having broken the commandment, He caused the
cherubim and the fiery sword to guard the way to the tree of life that he might not eat of it and
live in that transgression (cf. Gen 3:24).
Again I hear him during the building of the house in Ezekiel, setting forth the places that
everyone may enter. But as for the holy of holies, it is the high priest alone who goes (cf. Heb 9:7)
in there.
As for the gate that is on the east (side), it is this one by which no stranger enters nor do they
go out by it except for the one who is to eat his bread in it alone (cf. Ezek 44:3) and come out.

There follows the argument from analogy:

20 Didymus the Blind, refering to the bee of Prov 6:8, does attribute an allegorical sense to the land flowing with
milk and honey: "In the twofold sense, tropological and allegorical, the land worthy of blessing flows with milk
and honey, from which come spiritual nourishment and good cheer, honey being the result of the bee's display of
God's wisdom, according to the proverb recommending the industrious man in these terms: 'Go to the bee and
learn that it is a worker; it is held up as a model of esteem for wisdom, since both princes and peasants turn its
labors to their good health; it is an object of desire and commendation.' It is with this sweetness and milk that the
holy land flows, the apostle giving the latter as drink to the infants in Christ." Didymus, Commentary on
Zechariah. Tr. Robert C Hill; Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 2006, p. 153 [=Book 2,
section 215].
21 Sheridan 1998: 62 (text), 128 (translation).

nqe gar nouHi: nrm+mao ereouon nim bHk ehoun erof qaeit peqrinon
petriklinon ouon nim etbHk ehoun eroou etHp epoikwdespotHs eite hm+hal
eite rm+he mn+petkwlu m+moou pmanenkotk de m+pjoeis mpHi: H mman+hwp
n+nefeidos n+anagkaion mn+rwme nim naeybwk epma etm+mau
For it is like a rich man's house into which everyone goes. As for the forecourt, the atrium, the
dining room, it is everyone who goes into them who is related to the master of the house, whether
slave or free. There is no one who hinders them. But as for the bedroom of the lord of the house
or the hiding places of his goods, of necessity not everyone will be able to go there.

And finally there is the general conclusion:

tai te qe n+napokruPon m+poutaas nouon nim eqewrei m+moou H ejoou .
nai: hwwn on ntanei ehrai: ejwou etenai :ne ntopos ntnoc neuCH tai:
n+tafywpe n+hHts afylHl nhHts ehrai epefeiwt n+cipswtHr tai: entanpwh
eros enyaje nm+mHtn+ ansahwwn epahou tenourw yantennau
jetennaeyerr_mnHi: hm+pnoc nHi n+Yma m+pn+tafouehtsnte etrefeytplwby+
m+pkwt ebol etepai: pe parCHgos n+tpisYs . mn+prefjwk ebol i_s peC_s
pn+joeis
This is the way it is with hidden things. It has not been given to everyone to see them or to
speak them. It is these (things) that we have come to, that is, the subjects of the great prayer. It is
this in which the savior dwelt and in it he prayed to his father. It is this that we have reached and,
speaking to ourselves, we pull back meanwhile until we see that we will be able to become men
of the household (cf. Gal 6:10) in the great house honoring him who laid the foundation that he
might be able to complete the edifice, that is, the author and finisher of our faith Jesus the Christ
our Lord (Heb 12:2).22

So far, the entire passage, of which the beginning is missing, has been directed to explaining
the activity of the preacher rather than the text itself. It constitutes a very elaborate preface or
what would be called an exordium in a panegyrical sermon. It may be that this preface was
conceived as an introduction to the entire series of homilies in order to explain the kind of
spiritual interpretation that Rufus intended to offer.
However, there are other examples of an elaborate preface with the use of Christianized
chreia in his homilies. Here only one will be noted. The superscription to the tenth homily
states that the text being commented on is Matt 4:17: From that time on Jesus began to preach
and to say, 'Repent for the kingdom of heaven has drawn near.' The text opens with an
elaborate anaphora:23

anau

epsotbef m+ponHron jeouhotepe nay n+he jinpefmounk mpatouCrw

mmof eeire n+tefergasia. nqe nousHbe mn+oumereh eyakhe eroou
euhahote mpatefjitou etootf epolemei n+hHtou n+cipeirwme natna
anau hwwf epecroc etnanouf nqe eyafei ehrai: efroout jintefhoueite
m+patefnou je ehrai m+pefkarpos.
22 See note 14 above. The text here has been supplemented from Mingarelli, fasc.III, frag. XX, p. LXI, f.2.
23 The text has been arranged to emphasize the rhetorical structure. In the manuscripts the structure is sometimes
emphasized by beginning each element of the anaphora with a larger letter.

anau

on epourot mpeklom mn+tefterTis jinerepteCnitHs erhwb erof

mpate petnaPorei m+mof talof ejn+tefape&
anau eYwte m+pebiw jeyasjihloc nay nhe jineshn+tpe eti: eshntmHtra
mpaHr mpatesei epesHt e+jmpeCortos etrefbits nfepexargaze mmos
hm+pti:hmef ncipaf
anau hwwf epilogos efonh n+qe etefYhloc epmaaje n+netswtm
jintehouei te m+pateftayeoeiy m+patefcwlp+ m+ptihmf+ m+pefeiw n+tesbw
nfY erwou n+netnaji ebol n+hHtou nai: etcwyt hHtf m+pilogos etonh
euyanjiY pe m+moou yauwy ebol . je anekyaje hloc hn+rwi: panoute
parapefei:w .
Behold the evil weapon, how terrible it is (from the moment of) its manufacture before even it is
needed to perform its function, like a sword and a spear which when you find them are
fearful even before this merciless man takes them up to make war with them.
Behold also at the good seed, how it comes up eagerly from the first before it puts forth its fruit.
Behold also at the profusion of the wreath and its delight while the craftsman is still making it
before the one that will wear it puts it on his head.
Behold the dew of the honey, how it acquires sweetness from being in the sky, while it is still in
the womb of the air, before it comes down upon the grass for the bee to take it and work it
in the hive.
Behold also at the living word, how it gives sweetness to the ear of those who listen from the
beginning even before he preaches, before he opens the hive of the honey of doctrine and
puts (it) on the mouths of those who will receive from them. It is these that look toward him,
to the living Word. If they taste them, they cry out, "Your words have been sweeter in my
mouth, my God, than honey" (Ps 118:103).24

Presumably the preacher is referring to the text that has just been read. With the citation of
Ps 118, he takes up the theme of honey as a symbol for hidden meaning that had been exploited
in the preface to the first homily. Unfortunately, except for the introductory words to the
citation of Matt 4:17, the text that should follow has been lost and so we do not know how
Rufus tied this preface to the explanation of the text. In any case, from the point of view of
rhetorical composition, this is a rather elaborate use of chreia combined with or in the form of
an anaphora.25
This passage is quite similar in style to two passages from another sermon that is possibly
from the same period:26
24 See Sheridan 1998: 103-105 (text), 154 (translation).
25 For the rhetorical device of anaphora, see C. Blasberg, "Anapher" Historisches Wrterbuch der Rhetorik (hrsg.
Gerd Ueding; Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1992) 1:542-545.
26 J.B. Bernardin, "A Coptic Sermon attributed to St. Athanasius [CPG 2184: In passionem]" JTS 38 (1937) pp.
113-129. Depuydt, Catalogue of Coptic Manuscripts, no. 170, 7 (p. 348). The manuscript is M595, ff. 100v 108r.
CPG 2184: In passionem. Coptic clavis 0051. On the basis of content Orlandi suggested a 4th to 5th century
possibly Greek original without excluding the possibility of a Coptic original. However, on the basis of rhetorical
style similar to that of another pseudo-Athanasian composition, De Lazaro e mortuis reuocato, an original Coptic
composition of the sixth century seems possible. See my "Rhetorical Structure in Coptic Sermons" The World of
Early Egyptian Christianity: Language Literature and Social Context. Essays in Honor of David W. Johnson
(edited by James D. Goehring and Janet A. Timbie; Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press,
2007) pp. 37-39.

anau on etmn+tagaqos epnoute n+terekaein hwtb+ n+abel pefson .

afkw n+oumaein hijwf je n+nelaau hwtb+ m+mof je mwgis [f.102v2]
f+nametanoi: nf+kw naf ebol 7
anau on etmn+tagaqos m+peiwt n+terefeine m+pkataklHsmos
ejm+pkosmos nf+take sarx+ nim etbeneujin+cons+ mn+neuanomia auw
n+terefnau en+sarx+ n+n+rwme eunHj ebol eumoout pejaf je ai:r+htHi: je
ai+takepkah 7
anau on etmn+agaqos m+pnoute eremwu:sHs parakalei m+mof je eyje
ai:cine n+ouCaris m+pekm+to ebol ouonhk+ nai: ebol tanau erok .
anau je afei epesHt hijm+ ptoou n+sina afaheratf+ afouwnh+ naf ebol
m+pesmot m+pefeoou . ounoute eafpiqe n+ourwme oujoeis efsolsl+
m+pefhm+hal 7
Behold, again, the goodness of God when Cain killed Abel his brother. He put a sign upon him in
order that no one might kill him, because perhaps He will repent and forgive him (Gen 4:15).
Behold, again, the goodness of the Father when He brought the flood upon the world and
destroyed all flesh on account of their wrongs and lawlessness (Gen 6:17). And when He saw
the flesh of man abandoned and dead, He said: I have repented that I destroyed the earth. (Gen
9:8)
Behold, again, the goodness of God when Moses besought Him: If I have found favour in Your
sight, reveal Yourself to me that I may see You. (cf. Exod 24:16)
Behold, He came down upon Mount Sinai and stood and revealed to him the appearance of His
glory a God Who obeyed a man; a Lord Who comforts His servant.

And from the same sermon another similar anaphora:

anau ce epeiwt efqewrei m+pefyHre euYeibt+ naf ehoun epye
m+pestauros
anau epem+kah n+hHt m+peiwt erenefyHre aitei n+oukoui:m+moou
hipestauros euY naf n+ouhm+j+ mn+ousiye .
anau epeiwt erem+matoi: pwy n+n+hoi:te m+pefyHre ejwou eunej klHros
ejn+tefhb+sw .
anau epeiwt ereplHstHs eqoou nocnec m+mof hiiipestauros efjw
m+mos
je n+sabHl je akkr+nobe n+eunan+tk+ an epei:ma .
anau epiwt erepilatos apilH epefyHre .
anau epeiwt erepefyHre rike n+tefape epei:sa . mn+nai: m+pefcn+
man+rekt+ tefape hipestauros efnaY m+pepneuma .
anau epeiwt efqewrei m+pefyHre eukwns+ m+mof n+oulogCH
etbenennobe .
anau epeiwt erepefyHre Y m+pefpneuma enefcij et[f. 105r1]be pgenos
n+n+rwme . nai: tHrou auaau m+pyHre m+pnoute auw afaniCe
hn+tefmn+tagaqos . nerepeiwt m+kah n+hHt efnau epefyHre hn+nei:hise
tHrou efaniCe hn+tefmn+tagaqos . m+peftako m+pefplasma tHrf+
n+ouounou n+ouwt7 nim n+rwme eneh ei:e ouqHrion ei:e ouhalHt petnanau
epefyHre eueire n+nai: tHrou naf nf+aniCe
Behold, indeed, the Father as He looked upon His Son as they nailed Him to the wood of the cross.
Behold the deep sorrow of the Father as His Son asked for a little water on the cross and they gave
Him vinegar and gall.
Behold the Father as the soldiers divided the garments of His Son among them and cast lots for
His clothing.
Behold the Father as the wicked thief derided Him upon the cross, saying: Unless You hadst
sinned, they would not have brought You to this place.
Behold the Father when Pilate threatened His Son.
Behold the Father when His Son bowed His head on this side and that and did not find a place to
bend His head upon the cross, as He was about to give up the spirit.

Behold the Father when He looked upon His Son as they pierced Him with a spear for our sins.
Behold the Father when His Son gave His spirit into His hands for the human race. All these things
were done to the Son of God and He endured in His goodness. The Father was deeply
grieved when He saw His Son in all these sufferings which He endured in His goodness, but he
did not destroy all His creation in a single hour. What man or beast or bird will ever see all these
things being done to his offspring and him enduring them?

These two passages from a pseudonymous homily of possibly contemporaneous origin have
been cited to reinforce the idea of a rhetorically sophisticated milieu as suggested by Cribiore.
Rufus himself makes frequent use of anaphora throughout his homilies. At the end of the
eighth homily on Matthew [41. B9] we find another anaphora in a concluding peroration with a
series of citations of biblical figures.
atetnswtm+ etbepaggelos n+tafdiakonei ehHlias efenoeik naf efouwm
himoou efsw:
atetnswtm+ etbepentafdiakonei edaniel eafbi nambakoum mn+pariston
eafji mmof yarof epyHi: nm+moui:
atetnswtm etbepyomn+t n+hagios n+qe n+tapaggelos bwk epesHt etehrw
afwym+ m+pyah m+pkwht haroou
atetnswtm+ etbenehoou n+senaCerim n+qe ntapaggelos m+pjoeis ei ebol
afmouout ebol hentparembolH n+nassurios m+mntBy\mHn ntbaoucos
nououyH n+ouwt
atetnswtm+ hielissaios jenereptoou meh n+hto hiharma nkwht euboHqei
epeproPHtHs
atetnswtm etbepaggelos n+tafouwn n+n+ro m+peyteko n+teuyH afenpetros
ebol auw afpatasse nhHrwdHs aferbn+t afmou.
tai: on teqe tenou ene mn+petmiye ejwnpe eyjpe auomken enonh
n+cinetYoubHn. rayece tenou plaos ndikai:os nkcmcom hi:n[&&&] n+ksmou
epnoute petmiye ejwn emn+petna eyYoubHn peCristos pentafmou
n+houo de pentaftwoun ebol hennetmoout pai: on ethiounam m+pnoute
auw etsm+me ehrai: haron. nim petnaporjn+ etagapH mpnoute.
pai: peoou naf mn+pamahte mn+texousia haqH n+naiwn tHrou mn+pefeiwt
nagaqos mn+peD etouaab yaeneh neneh hamHn
You have heard about the angel who ministered to Elias bringing bread to him to eat and water to
drink (cf. 1 Kgs 19:5).
You have heard about the one who ministered to Daniel when he carried Habakuk and the lunch
he had fixed to him in the lion's den (cf. Dan 14:34).
You have heard about the three holy ones, how the angel came down to the furnace and quenched
the flames of the fire around them (cf. Dan 3:49).
You have heard about the days of Sennacherib, how the angel of the Lord came and killed in the
camp of the Assyrians one hundred eighty-five thousand in a single night (cf. 2 Kgs 19:35).
You have heard about Eliseus, that the mountain was filled with horses and chariots of fire
helping the prophet (cf. 2 Kgs 6:17).
You have heard about the angel who opened the doors of the prison at night and brought Peter out
(cf. Acts 12:7) and he struck Herod and he was worm-eaten and died (cf. Acts 12:23).
This is also how it is now. If there had been no one who fights for us, then those who fight against

10

us would have swallowed us up alive (cf. Ps 123:2-3). Now then, rejoice, you just people, and
be strong [......] and bless God who fights for us, since there is no one who will be able to prevail
against us. "It is the Christ who has died who is all the more the one who has risen from the
dead. He it is also who is at the right hand of God and who intercedes for us. Who is it who will
separate us from the love of God?" (Rom 8:34).
To him be the glory and the power and the dominion before all ages with his good Father and the
Holy Spirit for ever and ever. Amen.27

In another homily on the sixth beatitude (Matt 5:8) there is an anaphora of biblical citations or
citations of biblical figures:

ai:swtm

eiakwb . efjw m+mos je

ai:nau epjoeis asoujai: n+citaTuCH
ai:ktoi: on aiswtm erof jenterefsaat n+cipeine m+
pnoute
ai:swtm epnoc narCHproPHtHs mwusHs efai:tei
n+nau epho m+pnoute m+nefeycmcom enau
pejaf gar naf jen+nerwme nau epaho n+fwnh .
ai:nau on ehHlias erepeD etyoome naparage m+mof
pai: eterepeD m+pnoute n+hHtf teipnoH n+leptH
I heard Jacob say: "I have seen the Lord; my life has been preserved" (Gen 32:31 LXX).
I turned back again and I heard: "When the likeness of God passed by me" (Gen 32:32).
I heard the great archprophet Moses asking to see the face of God and he was not able to see,
for He said to him: "Man shall not see my face and live" (Exod 33:20).
I also saw Elias when the subtle spirit was about to pass by him. It is this in which was the
spirit of God, this light breath (cf. 1 Kgs 19:12 LXX) 28

ANTITHETON
Rufus also made use of other rhetorical forms including antithesis (antitheton), apostrophe,
the rhetorical question and the imaginary interlocutor. The latter had been used even by Origen
in homilies. Part of the exordium of the fifth "exegesis" on Luke 1:26-27 contains a set of
antitheses (antitheton)29:
afnau epjaje jefhHpokrine hnousmot mmHtmairwme .
efti mpefouoi eron hmpsumboulos .
pnoute de afouenehtefagapH ebol ehoun eron hws noute nagaqos .
27 See Sheridan 1998: 97 (text), 149 (translation).
28 See Sheridan 1998: 113 (text), 158 (translation).
29 For the rhetorical device of antitheton, see J. Villwock, "Antithese" Historisches Wrterbuch der Rhetorik
(hrsg. Gerd Ueding; Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1992) 1:722-750. Antitheton is a more
complex figure than anaphora involving a series of antitheses or contrasts, which often have a philosophical or
theological basis, as in this case. For varieties of antitheton, see also H. Lausberg, Handbuch der literarischen
Rhetorik (3. Ausgabe; Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1990) 787-807. Villwock, "Antithese," notes the connection
between antitheton and "typology," tracing it back to Marcion and mentioning the contrast of Eve and Mary
without, however, giving any specific patristic examples (col. 732). It should be noted that the word "typology" is a
modern notion and is never found in ancient texts, although the word "typos" is used, often with the same meaning
as allegory. Others prefer to view "typology" as a subdivision of allegory.

11

eukwh mnoubwl ebol mpjaje .

pros qe ntaiyrpjoos . apdiabolos Pqoni eron efi ntootn n+tmnthmhal .
apnoute tahmen etmHtyHre .
apjaje treunojn ebol hmpparadisos .
alla apjoeis ouwn nan ntpHlu n+tpe
auponHreue eron hmpparadisos ntetruPH
alla pentafponHreue eron hmptopos ntenanapausis .
aunojf ebol hnmpHue ehrai ejmkah . aufitk hwwk premekah ehrai
etpe .
He saw that the enemy was dissembling in the guise of a friend of mankind approaching us as the
counsellor.
But God revealed his love toward us as a good God to the envy and consternation of the enemy.
As I said before, the devil envied us, carrying us into slavery;
God summoned us to sonship.
The enemy let us be cast out of Paradise,
but the Lord opened the gate of heaven to us.
We were wronged in the Paradise of delight,
but the one who acted wickedly toward us in the place of our rest was thrown out of the
heavens down upon the earth, and you, the man of earth, were taken up to heaven. 30

And from the same introduction to the same fifth "exegesis" we have another example of
antitheton:
ntaeuha ouehhHts etntolH mpparadisos .
maria hwws ntasw mpwnh hmperpe .
euha nterouyaje nmmas hitmphob asouwyb naf ajmmoujt
maria hwws aswrj mmos hntescinouwyb naf
asouonhf ebol asmpya ntpistis auw so nhote petounataaf nas .
euha ouhobpe ntafyaje nmmas afapata mmos
maria hwws eseire mpmeeue ntentauapata mmos aswrj nnesya
je . loipon asouwyb hnouparadurisis mnoutihtHf
It was against the command of Paradise that Eve set her heart.
It was in the temple that Mary, for her part, conceived life.
Eve, when she was spoken to by the serpent, answered without consideration (thoughtlessly).
Mary, on the other hand, was firm when she answered him. She showed him that she was
worthy of the trust and she is in awe of what would be given her.
With Eve, it was a serpent that spoke to her and he deceived her.
Mary, on the other hand, was mindful of her who had been deceived and she confirmed her
words. Moreover she answered with discernment and prudence. 31

There follows as part of the same commentary in the fifth "exegesis" a description of Mary in
anaphoric style, which forms a kind of counterpoint to the antitheses describing Eve earlier in
the exordium:
ounomoqetHs te tp_a_+r+_q_ essooun epnomos mnneproPHtHs . pyaje
ntassotmef .
asjitf enqe nounouf efsotp+ . auw eftaHu .
30 Sheridan 1998:189 (text), 228 (translation).
31 Sheridan 1998: 191 (text), 229 (translation).

12

asjitf+ ehoun epmantihap etorj+ ntepesmeeue

aspastf kalws hmpkwht mpeslogismos
asouohtf hntdiakrHsis mpesmeeue .
asdokimaze je ouay mmine pe piaspasmos
astahepesnous eratf nqe noukebernitHs enanouf efamahte
mpefhinie hnouwrj . mHpote ntetootf hise. ntepefjoi bwk hasie
taiteqe ntatparqenos amahte mpeslogismos. mnpesmokmek
hnoutihtHf mHpote nsouwyb hnoumHtrefbocs ebol nsjepauein tHrf
ebol nmtw .
The virgin is learned in Scripture, knowing the law and the prophets. The word that she heard:
She received like choice and precious gold.
She took it into the secure place of judgement of her thought.
She refined it well in the fire (cf. Sir 2:5?) of her reason.
She cast it in the discernment of her thought.
She examined what sort of greeting this was.
She set her mind to it, just as a good steersman takes firm hold of his rudder lest its handle be
unmanageable and his boat be shipwrecked. So the virgin took hold of her reason and her
thought with attention lest she answer impetuously and take the whole cargo to the bottom. 32

Here Rufus is introducing also a comparison (synkrisis) with the pilot or steersman
(kebernitHs), a rather common one found in other Coptic texts (e.g. Silvanus).
The angel Gabriel then reads Mary's thoughts and dialogues with them. This involves the use
of or adaptation of yet another of the progymasmata, "ethopoeia" or "prosopoeia."33 Here Mary
does not actually speak, but her thoughts are described:
loipon tiswtm erof jenterefbwk nas ehoun pejaf nas je Cere
tentascn hmot pjoeis nmme.
oupe pibwk nas ehoun . estwn ncimaria . alla eikH an aftaue pai .
ereplogos tamo mmon ephwp nt+parqenos . mnphihoun etespolutia.
mnpescreht etesesuCia
tai ntasempya nouaspasmos naggeligon je Cere tentascnhmot pjoeis
nmme . piaspasmos etmpelaau mate mmof eneh . eimHYtirefjpenoute
mauaas.
Further on I hear, when he went in to her, he said to her, Hail, you who have found favor. The
Lord be with you (Luke 1:28).
What is this going into her? Where is Mary? But it is not without reason that he has mentioned
this, since the text is informing us of the hidden (life) of the virgin and of her interior way of life
and of her quiet tranquillity.
As for this woman, it is an angelic greeting that she is worthy of - Hail, you who have found favor.
The Lord is with you - this greeting which no one else ever enjoyed, except the begetter of God
alone.
32 Sheridan 1998: 197 (text), 231 (translation).
33 See G. Naschert, "Ethopoeia" Historisches Wrterbuch der Rhetorik (hrsg. Gerd Ueding; Darmstadt:
Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1992) 2:1512-1516. For the treatment of this figure in the progymnasmata,
see Kennedy 2003: 47 (Aelius Theon), 84 (Hermogenes), 115 (Aphthonius) and 164 (Nicolaus the Sophist).
Hermogenes distinguishes between personifying a thing (prosopoeia) and imagining "words for a real person"
(ethopoeia). He also distinguishes between ethical and pathetical personifications. Those introduced by Rufus
belong to the ethical category since they correspond to the character of Mary.

13

This leads to reflection on the part of Mary, that is, the angel is reading her mind:
ntos de asytortr ejmpyaje pejaf. aserhote njn+oou.
aserypHre mpiaspasmos hws efjpo noumHtybHr . auw asakoni
ejnouyaje efcHn hws efmehmmHtmairwme . auw nesmokmek mmos jeoupe
phwb nouhoout efyaje mnoushime. scwyt men epesCHma hws semnos .
ouaggelos gar pe esnau erof eousmot nrwme pe . asmokmek loipon
jeouay mmine pe piaspasmos . mH ara pejas euerhal mmoi hmperhal
ntauerhal etmaau m+pagenos jineyorp auw asytortr .
Now as for her, she was disturbed over what he said. She was afraid of asking. She was amazed at
this greeting as though it evoked familiarity and she became alert at a speech which was soft as if
full of human affection and she was wondering what business has a male speaking with a woman.
She regards indeed the outward appearance as worthy of respect for it is an angel she sees in the
likeness of a man. She considered further what sort of greeting this was. May it not be, she said,
that I am being deceived by the deception with which the mother of my race was deceived in the
beginning, and she was disturbed.

There follows then more description of her thoughts and pondering, and then the Angel answers
her thoughts:
nhoson de esmokmek hinai apaggelos ouwyb pejaf nas . je mperr+hote
maria . arcine gar nouh mot nnahrm pnoute . ntapaggelos ouwyb
mpyaje an mmaria mpesyaje gar alla ntafouwyb mpesmeeue . afeime
gar epesmeeue . afepainou mpwrj ntesTuCH . afrypHre de on
mpentaftnnoouf fsooun gar je
ouay mmine pe pentaftnnoouf yaros efsooun epwrj ntesTuCH etbepai
ouei te touyaje etbHHts ebol hnoumHHye . ouei te ntausots ebol
hnhah tai etereHsaias tekstHHbe eros . je eis tparqenos naw nsjpo
nouyHre nsemoute epefran jemmanouHl eafjepai haqH noumHHye
ngenea hitmpepn+_a+ etouaab . efjw mmos jeeis tparqenos naw nsjpo
nouyHre . hws je ouei te hmpkah tHrf.
While she was pondering these things thus, the angel answered and said to her, Do not be afraid,
Mary. You have found favor with God (Luke 1:30). It was not the speech of Mary that the angel
answered - for she had not spoken - but it was her thought that he answered. For he knew her
thought. He commended the constancy of her soul. But he also marveled at the one who had sent
him, for he knew what sort of one it was who had sent him to her, (one who) knows (i.e., God) the
constancy of her soul. Therefore she is the one of whom so much is spoken. She is the one who has
been redeemed among many, this one to whom Isaias pointed: Behold, the virgin will conceive and
bear a son and he will be called Emmanuel (Isa 7:14), having said this many generations before
through the Holy Spirit, saying: Behold the virgin will conceive and bear a son as if she is unique
on the whole earth.34

APOSTROPHE
Rufus makes fairly frequent use of apostrophe, the figure in which a speaker breaks off, or
more literally "turns away," from addressing the audience (e.g., in a play) and directs speech to
an absent third party, whether dead or alive, or even to an impersonal object.35 It has been
34 Sheridan 1998: 198-199 (text), 231-232 (translation).
35 See A. W. Halsall, "Apostrophe" in Historisches Wrterbuch der Rhetorik (hrsg. Gerd Ueding; Darmstadt:
Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1992) 1:830-836.

14

described as "pathetic step of desperation on the part of the speaker."36 It may be in the form of
an exclamation or in the form of a question. In commenting on Matt 2:17-18 Rufus turns to
Rachel (mentioned in the quotation Jer 31:15 in Matt 2:18) and addresses her directly:
ahro terime w hraCHl auw etbeou toeit nteshe n+taumerits eiri:me
jeautwrp n+n+ayHre hmpahamHr aumouout m+pkarpos nhHt efayntaekibe.
hw ero w hraCHl Ymton epouhroou ebol hmprime auw noubal maroulo
euYrmeiH aumouout nnouyHre hn+oujincon+s n+tetn+anojou ebol an
Why are you weeping, O Rachel, and why such mourning? "It is because they have seized my
children from my arms and killed the fruit of my womb crying for my breast that I am
weeping . . .
To you also, O Rachel, I give relief to your voice from your sobbing and as for your eyes, let
them cease producing tears. Your children have been killed through violence. We will not
abandon them.37

Later on, when commenting on the statement that John the Baptist's clothing was of camel's
hair, Rufus exclaims:
ahrok mn+neibw n+camoul w i:whannHs eretahb+sw pejaf hn+neibw
n+camoul ebol jem+patefrwtsort+ nf+hwwke n+cipehieib jeerenehiome
nawqh n+ser+eiope n+setsabo etsoPia mpswhe n+seouwwje n+teiytHn
n+saht+ pe tai: etemn+matoi naypahs+ mn+strateuma naypoys+ eimHtei
peterepeklHros natahof nf+jits+ .
Why (are you clothed) with those camel's hairs, O John? "It is out of these camel's hairs," he
said, "that my clothing is (made) because the lamb has not yet grown wool and been sheared so
that the women might weave and spin and demonstrate the skill of weaving and cut this woven
garment. It is this (garment) that no soldier will be able to tear, no army will be able to divide
except the one to whom the lot will fall, and he will receive it" (cf. John 19:23). 38

After an imaginary interlocutor interrupts and demands a clear explanation, he turns back
explicitly to his audience saying: "Listen, O hearer: John's garment is (made) out of camel's
hair. The camel does not split the hoof but it does ruminate." This is the introduction to a
complex allegorical explanation that ends with the programmatic statement "The new Word,
having made worship of this carnal sort, circumcision, times, festivals, the temple, and the
worldly altar with its furnishings to come to naught, all these things, he reduced through the
spirit to make them enter through the discernment of allegory."39

36 "ein pathetischer Verzweiflungsschritt des Redners" Lausberg, Handbuch der literarischen Rhetorik 762.
37 See Sheridan 1998: 65-66 (text), 131 (translaton).
38 See Sheridan 1998: 81-82 (text), 138-139 (translation).
39 For the exegetical background of this statement, see Sheridan, "The Influence of Origen on Coptic Exegesis in
the Sixth Century: the Case of Rufus of Shotep" Origeniana Octava. Origen and the Alexandrian Tradition.
Papers of the 8th International Origen Congress, Pisa 27-31 August 2001 (Leuven: Peeters, 2003) pp. 1023-1033.

15

Rufus also often employs a variation of apostrophe when he addresses his audience abstractly
in the third person singular as "O Man." In the context of the temptations experienced by Christ
in the desert, he exclaims:
m+perhko n+kyine nsaouwm w prwme n+tafnHsteue epkosmos
mn+nethm+pkosmos mmon ekyanhko m+moou on nentaknHsteue eroou on
nteunou fnaYpefouoi: erok ncipetpiraze nkswtm ebol hitootf
nnetsHh m+peitupos.
Do not hunger and seek for food, O man. It was from the world and the things in the world that
he fasted. For, if you hunger again for those things from which you have also fasted, then
suddenly the tempter will approach you and you will hear from him the things written of in this
typical case.40

Similarly, commenting on the beatitude "Blessed are the merciful, because it is they to whom
mercy will be shown" (Matt 5:7), he exhorts:
na tarouna nak w prwme
yenehtHk tarouyenehtHu harok
kw ebol taroukw nak ebol
Have mercy that you may be shown mercy, O man!
Have compassion that you may receive compassion.
Forgive that you may be forgiven (cf. Luke 6:37). 41

He makes use of this figure also in the homilies on Luke. For example, in the context of the
annunciation scene of Luke 1:26-27, he exclaims:
w prwme sesobte etbHHtk noucim+mi:se nqauma .
etreouacrHn jpeyHre nteouparqenos mpessoun+hoout mi:se
anau enePusi:s etoubi:aze mmoou. etbe je akji:ncons+ etePusi:s
n+tekmHtrwme n+yor+p w prwme
O man, a marvelous generation is being prepared for your sake, that someone barren might
bear a son and a virgin who did not know man give birth. Look at the natural phenomena
which suffer violence, because you did violence to the nature of your humanity previously, O
man. 42

In this case the apostrophe is artfully repeated to form an inclusion with antitheses within the
inclusion. Further along in his exposition of the annunciation scene, Rufus uses the same
device:
afji nouswma nrwme . eftaHu auw efhaypHre . eaftamiof naf
hntekPusis w prwme . afouonhf ebol hws rwme .
m+pefnouj ebol n+tefmHtnoute nyorp . afjiswma ce afrrwme .
yantefkto mpentafswrm tefYtootf mpentafhe .
nfmour mpjwwre . teftounespetmoout
40 See Sheridan 1998: 90 (text), 144 (translation).
41 See Sheridan 1998: 110 (text), 157 (translation).
42 See Sheridan 1998: 180 (text), 224 (translation).

16

He took a human body, precious and wonderful, having fashioned it for himself with your
nature, O man. He appeared as man. He did not discard his prior divinity, but took a body and
became man, that he might convert the one who had gone astray, help the one who had fallen,
and bind the strong one, and raise the one who was dead.43

At the conclusion of the scene he exclaims:

asjwk ebol nciYdiakonia apaggelos bwk ehrai etpe .
w niyaje etonh eto nyouyipe hHtou .
nai epetyye eron pe meleta nhHtou .
je eretnprokopH ouwnh ebol nouon nim .
The ministry was finished and the angel went up to heaven. O these living words, which are
worthy of being revered! These on which it is fitting for us to meditate that our progress might
be evident to everyone!44

ANTHYPOPHORA
Rufus also makes use of the device known in Greek as anthypophora or the imaginary
interlocutor, where one asks one's own questions or raises and then settles imaginary
objections.45 In commenting on the command of the angel (in a dream) to Joseph to return to the
land of Israel, Rufus had introduced the verse of Ps 75:2 "Great is his name in Israel," which he
then explains allegorically in terms of the traditional etymological meaning of the name "Israel"
as "he who sees God." The text is broken, but the allusion seems clear enough. Rufus is aware,
however, that such allegorical interpretation may seem strange to his hearers and so he says:
"Do not let someone think, beloved, that it is a strange teaching for which we are making you
zealous." This allows him to insist then that it is not strange, but belongs to the authentic
tradition of the church.46
Soon after this passage Rufus offers an allegorical explanation of Matt 2:22-23, where it is
explained why Jesus was called "the Nazorean." By using the rule of explaining Scripture by
means of Scripture, Rufus cites a number of other Scriptural passages where the word
"Nazorean" is found including the story of Samson and Dalilah in Judges 16:13-14, where
seven locks (plaits) of hair are mentioned. The number seven suggests the seven gifts of the
spirit (Isa 11:2), which Jesus kept intact. At this point Rufus seems conscious that he may be
stretching the imagination of his hearers and asks: "If someone will say that it is violence that
we are doing to the text by comparing the Nazorean that is revealed to the Nazorean that is
concealed, let him tell me, what is the virtue if you let your hair grow?" The text is
43 See Sheridan 1998: 190 (text), 228 (translation).
44 See Sheridan 1998: 207 (text), 235 (translation).
45 See J.A.E. Bons, "anthypophora" in Historisches Wrterbuch der Rhetorik (hrsg. Gerd Ueding; Darmstadt:
Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1992) 1:685-686.
46 See Sheridan 1998: 74 (text), 135 (translation), 268, 285 (interpretation).

17

unfortunately broken but after the missing leaf the preacher is continuing to warn against the
pleasures represented by Dalilah. The introduction of the imaginary objection has made it
possible to expand and insist on the allegorical interpretation.47
In explaining Matt 4:1 "then Jesus was taken to the desert by the spirit to be tempted by the
devil," Rufus first uses apostrophe: "O these spiritual successions!" Then he introduces an
anaphora of contrasts between the divine power of Jesus based on Scriptural allusions or
citations and the fact that he is being taken to the desert to be tempted. This is followed by
another apostrophe: "Do not hear and be disturbed, O hearer" and exhorts the hearers to be firm
in their faith in the humanity of "your Lord." Then he brings in an imaginary interlocutor:
"Someone will say to me, "if then it was as man (human) that he was taken up, what then is this
desert of which I am hearing?"48 Finally Rufus explains that the "desert" is to be interpreted as a
figure referring to "a state of desolation." But then he introduces the interlocutor again:
"Someone will say to me, "tell me the meaning of the expression, what desert is this to which
this divine son has been taken?"49 This allows him to expand on the theme, to introduce another
example of the "desert" citing Jesus' use of Ps 21:1 on the cross and to conclude with moral
exhortations.
Further along in the same homily and commenting on the temptation "let these stones
become bread" (Matt 4:3) after the fast of forty days and nights, Rufus says: "Someone will say
to me, "What sort of temptation is this? 'Say: let these stones become bread.'"50 This gives him
the opportunity to expand on the subject of spiritual food and the fact that there is harmful
teaching for the soul that must be rejected. The account of the next temptation to throw himself
down from the pinnacle of the temple is followed in turn by the introduction of the imaginary
interlocutor again: "Someone will say to me "this temptation is different."51 And this provides
the opportunity for further allegorical explanation of the "city" as the "soul." In each case the
imaginary interlocutor has been introduced to allow the preacher to correct potential
misunderstanding or to introduce new explanations.

CONCLUSION

47 See Sheridan 1998: 78 (text), 137 (translation), 286 (interpretation).

48 See Sheridan 1998: 88 (text), 142-143 (translation), 290 (interpretation).
49 See Sheridan 1998: 88-89 (text), 143 (translation).
50 See Sheridan 1998: 91 (text), 145 (translation).
51 See Sheridan 1998: 92 (text), 146 (translation).

18

The examples that have been offered of the various rhetorical devices employed by Rufus do
not by any means exhaust his capacity. However, from the examples cited it can be seen that
Rufus uses many more rhetorical figures than are usually found in the Greek tradition for textbased homilies. His homilies are not "unadorned," as text-based homilies theoretically should
be in distinction to panegyrical ones. On the contrary, they are composed with considerable
artistry, making use of chreia, synkrisis, chiasmus, anaphora, antitheton, apostrophe,
ethopoeia, anthypophoron, etc. Some of the figures employed, such as antitheton, require
careful composition as well as theological knowledge. This suggests that Rufus may have had a
rhetorical training as part of his education quite apart from his knowledge of the exegetical
tradition, which is extensive.52 Presumably he must have acquired this before becoming a monk.
Other writers of the same period show a similar acquaintance with the traditional rhetorical
forms. To these should be added perhaps some of the pseudonymous pieces such as those
attributed to Evodius of Rome and Pseudo-Athanasius, which show the mastery of a similar
high style.53 These latter pieces were of course not preached, but they were carefully composed
using traditional rhetorical figures. The observation of R. Cribiore with which we began: "It is
likely that all these writers became well-acquainted with the Patristic literature and with a
rhetorical education that apparently only the Greek schools could offer, is amply justified by
an examination of the use of rhetorical figures in the works of Rufus of Shotep. They bear
witness to the existence of a quite developed literary culture at the end of the sixth century in
Egypt.54
MARK SHERIDAN, O.S.B.

52 For a discussion of his knowledge of the exegetical tradition, see Sheridan 1998: 275-302. Of course the fact
that Rufus employs exegetical traditions developed much earlier does not imply that he had direct contact with
authors such as Justin or Irenaeus.
53 For an analysis of these, see Sheridan 2007: 25-48.
54 See also Arietta Papaconstantinou, "Dioscure et la question du bilinguisme dans l'gypte du VIe sicle" in Les
archives de Dioscore dAphrodit cent ans aprs leur dcouverte. Histoire et culture dans l'gypte byzantine, d.
par J.-L. Fournet (tudes d'archologie et d'histoire ancienne), Paris, 2008, p. 77-88, who places this literary
activity in a broader context of a social revaluation of the Egyptian language in comparison with the elite status of
Greek.

19