Grammar, Rhetoric, and the Enkyklios Paideia in Syriac
By John Watt, Cardiff
No Greek thinker was more respected and studied by learned
Syrians than Aristotle, but only two very brief Vitae of the philos¬
opher have come down to us in Syriac. Anton Baumstark opened
his classic study on this subject by noting that the paucity of
extant biographical material is not totally surprising, for the
Turkish and Mongolian invasions, and more especially the decay
of Syriac literary activity from the 14th century, opened up gaps
in the older Syriac literature. Furthermore, as exclusively theo¬
logical interests came increasingly to dominate Syriac intellectual
life, the greater would the gaps have become in the 'outside'
fields.' A considerable amount of material about Aristotle, how¬
ever, is preserved in Arabic, and it is likely that at least some of
it came from Greek into Arabic through Syriac. Biographical in¬
formation on Aristotle in Syriac was therefore probably once more
abundant than the little that has survived in Syriac manuscripts.^
Since learned Syriac and Arabic readers greatly admired Aris¬
totle's writings, it is likely that they would have been very inter¬
ested in his education. There is a report in al-Mubassir, derived
from the Siwän al-hikma, that at the age of eight he was taken by
his father to Athens, and for nine years was a pupil in a school
of poets, rhetors, and grammarians. The name of the knowledge
he acquired there, i.e.,'the knowledge of language'('///w
al-lisän), was called by them 'the all-round' (al-muhit). Some
' A. Baumstark: Aristoteles bei den Syrern vom V.-V/II.Jahrhundert. Leipzig, 1900 (reprinted Aalen, 1975), p.l. The two Syriac Vitae are edited on pp. 1-2 of the Syriac sequence.
2 Cf ibid., pp. 1-53, 105-130. See now the comprehensive survey by D. Gutas:
77ie Spurious and the Authentic in the Arabic Lives of Aristotle. In: J. Kraye,
W.F.Ryan, C.B.Schmitt (eds.): Pseudo-Aristotle in the Middle Ages. London,
1986, pp. 15-36.
philosophers, notably Epicurus, attacked this knowledge as ju¬
venile, false, and sycophantic, but Aristotle defended his teach¬
ers, declaring that philosophy could not do without the science of
the grammarians, poets, and rhetors, since speech (al-mantiqy
was an instrument of the philosopher's science. Only when he
himself, at the age of seventeen, had mastered the science of the
poets, grammarians, and rhetors, did he turn to philosophy and
become a pupil of Plato."
Hellenistic - which includes Roman and Byzantine - education
was divided into three stages: primary, secondary, and higher
education. The last of these had various forms: rhetoric, philos¬
ophy, law, and medicine. The common education which served
as a foundation {propaideia) for any of these specialist higher
studies was designated the enkyklios paideia, and in principle
covered the seven 'liberal arts' of grammar, rhetoric, dialectic,
arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music theory. In practice,
the literary side usually received more attention than the mathe¬
matical, and dialectic too was often neglected or put off to higher
education. Secondary education was therefore usually confined to
grammar and rhetoric' Since 'grammar' included the reading and
interpretation of the poets as well as (the later development oO
technical grammar, which latterly also covered metrics, while
poetic theory as a whole was absorbed into rhetoric,* poetry was
very much a part of 'grammar and rhetoric'. When therefore al-
' For this translation of al-mantiq here, cf D. Gutas: Greek Wisdom Literature in Arabic Translation. New Haven, 1975, pp. 396-398.
' Text/Translation/Commentary: J. Lippert: Studien auf dem Gebiete der grie¬
chisch-arabischen Überselzungslitteratur Braunschweig, 1894, pp. 5-6/11-12/30-
31; Baumstark: Aristoteles, pp. 128-129; A. Badawi: AbMubassir ibn Fätik,
Mukhtär abhikam. Madrid, 1958, pp. 179-180; l.DÖRWC: Aristotle in the Ancient Biographical Tradition. In: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis LXIII, 2. Goteburg,
1957, pp. 197-198/202. Cf. D.M. Dunlop: 77ie Muntakhab Siwän al-Hikmah of
Abü Sulaimän as-Sijistäni. The Hague, 1979, pp. 39-40; and on the Greek side, the references to Aristotle's liberal education in Vita Marciana 4 and Vita Vulgata 3, as also the Latin Vita Latina 4 (ed. Düring: op. cit., pp.97, 132, 151 respec¬
tively). Cf. also Diogenes Laertius V, 31.
* Cf , e.g., E. Norden: Die antike Kunstprosa. Leipzig/Berlin, ^1915-18,
pp. 670-679; H.I.Marrou: Saint Augustin et la fm de la cullure antique. Paris,
"1958, pp. 211-235; idem: Histoire de l'education dans I'antiquite. Paris, *I965, pp.243-279; H. Fuchs: art. 'Bildung' and 'Enkyklios Paideia'. In: Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum II, 346-362, and V, 365-398 (with bibliography).
» Cf Norden : Antike Kunstprosa, pp. 883-898.
Grammar, Rhetoric, and the Enkyklios Paideia in Syriac 47
Mubassir describes Aristotle's secondary education as 'poetry,
grammar, and rhetoric', and calls it al-muhit, the Arabic
term is clearly a rendering of enkyklios (literally, 'circular'), de¬
noting the predominant Hellenistic form of the enkyklios paideia,
namely, 'grammar' (both 'historical' and technical) and rhetoric'
This story probably arose in the Neoplatonic school of late
Alexandrian Aristotelianism, and was intended to portray Aris¬
totle's education as the prototype of that customary in late anti¬
quity.* However, our concern here is not with the origin of the
report, but with the implications of the fact that such a story was
known in some circles in the Near East, and in particular could
have been known to educated Syriac students, either in Greek,
Arabic, or in a possible Syriac intermediary. There is a wide¬
spread view among scholars that, by choice or chance, Syrians
and Arabs knew almost nothing of the literary-rhetorical heritage
of the Greeks, despite their interest in Greek (especially Aris¬
totelian) philosophy and science.' A reader of this text, however,
would surely have felt that he had missed something rather im¬
portant if he had not himself been educated in'the science of
the poets, rhetors, and grammarians', since Aristotle
apparently considered it indispensable for philosophy. In this
paper I should like to examine the hypothesis that the concept of
the enkyklios paideia would have been familiar to Syriac-speaking
readers of this text, and that having themselves received a 'second¬
ary school' education in poetry, grammar, and rhetoric, which to
some degree conserved the old Hellenistic ideal, they would not
' Cf. H. Daiber: Aelius Arabus: Die Vorsokraliker in arabischer Überlieferung.
In: Ak. d. Wiss. u.d. Lit., Mainz. Veröffentlichungen d. Orient. Komm., 33.
Wiesbaden, 1980, pp. 69-70.
' Cf. Gutas: Tlie Spurious and ihe Auiheniic (above, n.2), pp. 20-22, with criti¬
cal references to the earlier suggestions of Düring, Gignon, and Chroust; idem:
Avicenna and the Arislolelian Tradition. Leiden, 1988, pp. 203-204.
' Cf, e.g., R.Duval: La bllerature syriaque. Paris, 1907, p.299: 'La rhetorique et la poetique ... nous offrent peu d'interet pour la litterature syriaque'; F.Rosen¬
thal: Tlie Classical Heritage in Islam. London, 1975, p. 10: 'They no longer cared for rhetoric ... Nothing of Greek poetry, tragedy, comedy or the historical litera¬
ture was translated into Arabic. All this had been included in the school cur¬
riculum as part of rhetorical training'; P.Brown: The World of Laie Antiquity.
London, 1971, p. 186: 'Christian clergymen eventually passed Aristotle, Plato and Galen on to the Arabs; but in the medieval Near East, Christian and Muslim alike chose to remain ignorant of Homer, of Thucydides, of Sophocles. It was the end of a millennium of literary culture.'
have found it at all strange to discover this form of education
being endorsed by Aristotle.
Higher education in the eastern Roman Empire was confined
to the larger centres, even before Justinian centralised it at Con¬
stantinople, Alexandria, and Beirut (for law), but secondary edu¬
cation was more widely available, and it is not difficult to see how
the enkyklios paideia could have become known in Syria and Me¬
sopotamia. The Aramaic-speaking regions both west and east of
the Euphrates were for long exposed to Greek influence, at least
from 165 A.D. when the kings of Osrhoene became clients of
Rome. Edessa, the home of the Syriac dialect of Aramaic, was
bilingual under its local kings, as were other cities in the region,'"
and the influence of Greek in the area must have increased after
the dissolution of the monarchy and the consolidation of Roman
control in the third century." The sons of Edessan aristocrats were
accustomed to complete their education in centres of Greek
higher education,'^ which makes it likely that they had already
received a local secondary education in Greek, and in time
Edessa became famous in the East as a centre of basic Greek
studies. The future Catholicos Mar Aba, for example, studied
Greek there in the early sixth century under a teacher named
Thomas.'^ From Callinicum on the Euphrates we have another
striking example of the bilingual character ofthe region and the
prestige of Greek education, in the life of John (born 483), future
bishop of Telia, who was educated by his mother and grand¬
parents 'in the letters and wisdom of the Greeks'.'"
"= Cf. J.B.Segal: Edessa. Tlie Blessed City. Oxford, 1970, pp.30-31; F.Millar:
Paul of Samosata, Zenobia and Aurelian: The Church, Local Culture and Political Allegiance in Tliird-Century Syria. In: Journal of Roman Studies 61 (1971), pp. 1- 8; R. Schmitt: Die Ostgrenze von Armenien iiber Mesopotamien, Syrien bis Arabien.
In: Die Sprachen im römischen Reich der Kaiserzeit. Bonner Jahrbücher 40 (1980), pp. 196-202; S. Brock : From Antagonism to Assinülation : Syriac A ttitudes to Greek
Learning. In: N. G. Garsoian, T. F. Mathews, R.W.Thomson (eds.): East of By¬
zantium: Syria and Armenia in the Formative Period. Washington, D.C, 1982, p. 19.
" Cf Segal: Edessa, pp. 115-127.
'2 Cf. ibid., pp.31, 151-152.
" R Bedjan (ed.): Histoire de Mar-Jabalalia ... Paris/Leipzig, 1895, p. 218, 1.
5-10. Cf. A. Baumstark: Geschichte der syrischen Literatur. Bonn, 1922, p. 119;
Brock: From Antagonism to Assimilation, p.22.
" E.W.Brooks (ed./tr.): Vitae virorum apud monophysitas celeberrimorum. In:
Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium 7/8. Louvain, 1907, pp.39/28. Cf
Brock: From Antagonism to Assimilation, p. 21.
Grammar, Rhetoric, and the Enlcyklios Paideia in Syriac 49
The pattern of Hellenistic education survived the political tri¬
umph of Christianity,and in the Syriac areas after the Arab
invasions the monasteries became notable centres of Greek stud¬
ies. Qenneshre on the Euphrates and Mar Mattai near Mosul were
particularly famed in their respective regions during the seventh
and eighth centuries.'*
As the Roman world was bilingual and adopted Greek educa¬
tion, so too in Syria and Mesopotamia, at a later date, Hellenistic
culture moulded the educational system, with the position of Syr¬
iac in the East being somewhat analogous to that of Latin in the
West. Indeed, the well-documented history of Roman education
enables us to conceive how developments may have taken place
in later times in the Syriac East, where comparable direct evi¬
dence is lacking. Roman aristocrats had their children brought up
in Greek fashion in Greek schools, but in time alongside educa¬
tion in the Greek language there grew up a parallel course of
study in Latin, based on the Greek grammatical and rhetorical
curriculum. Some Roman aristocrats, such as Cicero, studied in
Athens or Rhodes, and subsequently Cicero by his own literary
activity raised Latin to the status of Greek as a language for ora¬
tory and philosophy. From that time onwards, educated Romans
became proficient in both languages, until the influence of Greek
declined with the growing importance of Latin, and the effort of
working on two languages became less necessary."
It is easy to imagine a comparable development in the Syriac
sphere. Secondary education in the Hellenistic fashion, while ini¬
tially Greek or bilingual, may in time have become predominantly
Syriac. The influence of Greek philosophy and literary forms is
already evident in the works of Bardaisän and his followers,'* and
from the sixth century we have evidence of Syriac texts on gram¬
mar and Aristotelian philosophy. Sergius of Reshaina (d. 536),
who studied in Alexandria, wrote on logic and science in Syriac,
and translated works of Aristotle." By this time, furthermore, the
" Cf. Marrou: Histoire (above, n.5), pp. 451-476, 485-489; W.Jaeger: Early Christianity and Greek Paideia. Cambridge, Mass., 1961.
" Cf Brock: From Antagonism to Assimilation, pp. 23-24.
" Cf Marrou: Histoire, pp. 356-388.
" Cf H.J. W. Drijvers: Bardaisän of Edessa. Assen, 1966, esp. pp. 60-76.
" On Sergius, cf Baumstark: Geschichle, pp. 167-169; Brock: From Antago¬
nism to Assimilation, p. 21.
literary use of Syriac had spread westwards, 'overrunning origi¬
nally Greek linguistic terrain';^" Probus, another early Syriac
translator and commentator of Aristotle, was a physician in An¬
tioch.^' We may imagine the bilingual phase lasting at least to the
early part of the eighth century; by the latter part, the use of
Greek was probably in decline.The resurgence of translation
activity under official Abbasid patronage at Baghdad in the ninth
century looks more like a 'classical renaissance' than a simple
extension of the Graeco-Syriac literary culture of the preceding
centuries, although it is of course inconceivable without that ear¬
lier bilingual culture.
It should therefore not be at all surprising to discover that the
enkyklios paideia, especially grammar and 'secondary school' rhe¬
toric, eventually took hold on Syriac education as on Latin, while
it would be surprising if those Syrians who learned the Greek
language never read any classical (non-Christian) Greek litera¬
ture.^' There is no doubt that Syriac students and authors studied
and wrote on technical grammar (methodike) in Syriac after the
Greek fashion; from the sixth century, there is a long list of Syriac
works on the subject, including a translation of the standard
Greek textbook, the Techne of Dionysius Thrax.^" They also
devoted much effort to the correct reading (anagnösis) and lin-
Baumstark: Geschichte, p.l; cf. ibid., pp. 58-66.
" Ibid., p. 102. Probus has usually been assigned to the fifth century and as¬
sociated with Edessa, but it is now clear that the link both with Edessa and the fifth century (on the basis of Abdisho's Catalogue) is incorrect. Cf Brock: From Antagonism to Assimilation, p. 26.
" Cf ibid., pp. 17-18, 27-29. In the eighth century. Homer was translated into Syriac - a significant pointer, perhaps, to the decline of the knowledge of the Greek language among Syrians. Cf below, pp. 207-208.
" It is unlikely that Abgar the Great (d.2l2) of Edessa was converted to Chris¬
tianity, a hypothesis sometimes advanced on the basis ofthe legend of Addai and Abgar Ukkama. However, even if it were true, or if Christianity made significant
progress in Edessa under Abgar the Great, that can hardly have permanently
obliterated among all Edessans acquainted with Greek an interest in classical (pagan) Greek literature. That literature, especially Homer and the poets, was, after all, the main content of most Greek paideia, after the triumph of Christianity in the Roman Empire as well as before, and for Christians as well as pagans.
" Cf A. Merx: Historia artis grammadcae apud Syros. In: AKM IX. 9. Leipzig, 1889. Text/Translation of the Syriac version of Dionysius Thrax on pp. 50-72/9- 28. There is a useful brief survey of the Syriac grammar literature in Duval: Litt, syr. (above, n.9), pp. 285-294.
Grammar, Rhetoric, and the Enkyklios Paideia in Syriac 51
guistic exposition {glössematikon) of literary Syriac.^' However,
the case of rhetoric and poetry (literature) is more controversial,
for a number of reasons. First, only a few rhetoric texts are extant
in Syriac,^* as compared to the considerable number on grammar.
Furthermore, the influence of classical rhetoric on Syriac litera¬
ture is not as evident as it is on Greek and Latin. Finally, the
Greek wisdom which the Syrians transmitted to the Arabs appears
to have been confined to the disciplines of logic, science, and
medicine, to the exclusion of rhetoric and literature.^' However,
it is becoming increasingly clear both that some Syriac^' and
Arabic^' authors were familiar with classical rhetoric. As for the
sparsity of Syriac rhetoric texts and translations of classical Greek
literature, that could to some extent be due to the very same
factors as those which caused the loss of Syriac biographical mate¬
rial on Aristotle,^" if in this case the Arabic interest in them was
insufficient to effect their further translation into Arabic. The
question therefore arises as to whether 'the science of the poets,
grammarians, and rhetors' was indeed adopted and cultivated by
the Syrians, or whether they restricted themselves to technical
grammar.
In the absence of direct information on the curriculum of any
'grammar school', an answer to this question might be found if
we had at our disposal an encyclopaedia giving us an overall view
of Syriac secular learning. We have such a work from the late
» Cf. Merx: Historia, pp. 1-4, 28-32; A. Vööbus: History of the School of Nisi¬
bis. In: Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium 266. Louvain, 1965,
pp.102, 137 f, 323.
" These are: The Rhetoric of Antony of Tagrit, the sections on rhetoric and poetics in the Dialogues of Jacob Bar Shakko, the section(s) on the Rhetoric (and Poetics) of Aristotle in Bar Hebraeus' Cream of Wisdom, and the Syriac version
of Aristotle's Rhetoric (and Poetics). Cf Duval: Litt, syr., pp. 299-301, and
J.W. Watt: Syriac Rhetorical Tlieory and the Syriac Tradition of Aristotle's Rhe¬
toric. In: Rutgers University Studies in Classical Humanities, vol. 6, ed.
W.W. Fortenbaugh. New Brunswick, N.J., forthcoming.
" Cf Rosenthal: Classical Heritage (above, n.9), p. 10.
" Cf J. W. Watt: Syriac Panegyric in Tlieory and Practice. Antony of Tagrit and EH of Qartamin. In: Le Museon 102 (1989), pp.271-298, and the literature cited there on p.272, n.9; idem: Syriac Rhetorical Theory (above, n. 26).
" Cf G.E. Grunebaum: Greek Form Elements in the Arabian Nights. In: JAOS 62 (1942), pp. 277-292; idem: Obseiyations on City Panegyrics in Arabic Prose.
Ibid. 64 (1944), pp. 61-65; Daiber: Aetius Arabus (above, n.7), pp.61-74.
^0 Cf. above, p. 193.
period in the Book of Dialogues of Jacob Bar Shakko (died 1241).
The structure of this treatise is very revealing. It is divided into
two Books. Book I has four Dialogues, devoted to grammar, rhe¬
toric, poetics, and the copiousness of Syriac (mostly a glossary of
rare or synonymous words); Book II has two Dialogues, devoted
to logic and philosophy, the latter divided into the definition and
divisions of philosophy, the philosophical way of life, physics, the
four mathematical sciences, and metaphysics.^' Book I is there¬
fore the propaideia of philosophy, while Book II deals with philos¬
ophy itself, its organon (logic), prolegomena (definition and divi¬
sion), practical part, and theoretical part (physics, mathematics,
and metaphysics). Book I covers the same three subjects men¬
tioned by the Siwän and al-Mubassir as propaedeutic to philoso¬
phy: grammar, rhetoric, and 'the poetic art' (metrics, assonance,
narrative, and figures, which is admittedly not the same as the
interpretation of the poets, although it includes examples from
them); dialectic and the four mathematical disciplines come in
Book 11.32
Baumstark believed that it was to Arabic rather than Syriac
that Bar Shakko was indebted for his schematisation of knowl¬
edge, in the case of Book I because grammar, rhetoric, and poet¬
ics approximately corresponds to what al-Färäbi first in his Cata¬
logue of the Sciences placed, as 'the science of language' {'ilm
al-lisän), in front of logic and philosophy." It is true that al-
Mubassir also called these three subjects 'ilm al-lisän, as well as
al-muhit {enkyklios)?* However, al-Färäbi's 'ilm al-lisän was not
grammar, rhetoric, and poetry, but grammar, the rules of correct
reading and writing, and versification, and the Aristotelian
philosopher, true to the Alexandrian Neoplatonist tradition,
placed rhetoric and poetics not under the science of language, but
of logic." Al-Färäbi and al-Mubassir therefore mean different
things by 'ilm al-lisän, and Bar Shakko's scheme is that of the
" Cf. W.Wright: Catalogue of Syriac Manuscripts in the British Museum ...
London, 1870-72, pp. 1165-1166; Merx: Historia (above, n.24), pp.209-215.
" The relation between the structure of Bar Shakko's Dialogues and the enky¬
klios paideia was already seen by Merx: ibid.
" Baumstark: Aristoteles (above, n.l), p. 182.
» Cf above, p.l93.
" Cf A. G.Palencia (ed./tr.): Al-Färäbi, Catalogo de las Ciencias. Madrid, 21953, pp. 9-21/5-12 {'dm al-lisän) and 42-43/29-30; 49-50/34-35 (rhetoric and poetics).
Grammar, Rhetoric, and the Enkyklios Paideia in Syriac 53
latter. But the latter's term is from a rendering of a Greek text,'*
and we must therefore inquire whether the combination 'gram¬
mar, rhetoric, and poetics' can be found in Syriac tradition prior
to Bar Shakko.
This question can be answered in the affirmative. In the pro¬
oemium to the Fifth Book of his Rhetoric, Antony of Tagrit''
writes:
With the Greeks, the three arts of grammar, rhetoric, and
poetry exist in a collected and crafted form, but with the
Syrians, Persians, and others, scattered and confused. For
example, a Syrian may use ... all the parts of the grammatical
art, and may prepare, put forth, and use particles and verbs
which ascend to speech, and these not with discrimination
and art, but either from exercise or from aptitude and dis¬
cerning power; just as a king may use a writing-board and
sheet, and a labourer or servant a table, not knowing how
these things were made. Again, an Arab may praise, blame,
or incite to battle, yet may never have learned the fair art
Cummänütä) of Demosthenes or the details of the science
(mellä) of rhetoric. And Persians, Syrians, Armenians, and
other nations compose poems (sogyätä), utter psalms, and
make comforting laments, yet have not been disciples of Ho¬
mer nor made their works akin to the types of his metres (V,
pp. 5-6).
The date of Antony is not certain. He probably lived in the
ninth century, as Bar Hebraeus thought, but a later date is not
out of the question, although he is certainly prior to Bar Shakko."
There is no doubt, however, that Bar Shakko does not owe his
" 'ilm al-lisän, if not added either by al-Mubassir himself or in the Arabic tradition, presumably renders Greek grammatike or philologia.
" Cf J. W. Watt: The Fifth Book of Ihe Rhetoric of Antony of Tagrit. In : Corpus
Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium 480 (Text)-48l (Translation). Louvain,
1986. Subsequent references to this Book V will be by the pages ofthe translation, those to Book I of the Rhetoric by its chapter divisions (thirty in all). On the
unedited Book I, cf. Watt: Syriac Rhetorical Theory (above, n.26), and
P. E. ESKENASV: Antony of Tagril's Rhetoric Book One. Harvard Diss., Cambridge, Mass., 1991. An edition of Book 1 is planned by Eskenasy and myself
" Cf Watt: Fifth Book (Translation), pp.v-x, and H.J. W. Druvers: Antony of Tagril's Book on the Good Providence ofGod. In : R. Lavenant (ed.) : V. Symposium Syriacum. Orientalia Christiana Analecta 236. Rome, 1990, pp. 163-166.
schematisation to an Arabic source, but to eariier Syriac tradition,
as found in Antony, and Antony points quite clearly towards the
Greeks as the inspiration for these arts. Antony's claim, however,
that prior to his own work, these arts were in a totally unsystem¬
atic state with the Syrians, has to be taken with a grain of salt,
certainly at least in the case of grammar, for which we know of a
number of Syriac works from earlier times.'' The claim to bring
forth something new was not a common topos in the Syriac pref¬
ace, but it is found among those of Syriac historians, especially
where it is a question of filling gaps left by earlier writers or
gathering scattered material into a unit."" Antony's claim in the
proem to Book V (pp. 6-8) to originality in collecting the scattered
and confused wisdom of the Syrians on poetics may be seen as a
typical attempt to win the reader's attention and goodwill {capta¬
tio benevolentiae),*'^ but even if he was indeed the first to write a
treatise on rhetoric or poetics in Syriac, he was in all probability
drawing on a Syriac (or bilingual Greek-Syriac) tradition of teach¬
ing in these subjects.''^ In the prooemium to Book I, on rhetoric,
he refers to 'predecessors and old masters, philos¬
ophers and guides {qäyöme) of speech, whoever
they may be, either from our own ranks or from
another religion' (I, 1 ad fin.).
Although Baumstark believed that the framework of Bar
Shakko's Dialogues was indebted to Arabic tradition, he never-
" Cf. Merx: Historia, pp. 1-108; Duval: Litt syr., pp.285-289. Antony was evidently aware of the late Alexandrian conception of the historical development of an art from practice to theory (cf. D. Gutas: Paul the Persian on the classification of the parts of Aristotle's philosophy: a milestone between Alexandria and Bagdad.
In: Der Islam 60 (1983), pp. 258-259), and presented himself as the first to estab¬
lish Syriac poetic theory. In place of the metaphor of the shoes found in Olym¬
piodorus (cf. ibid., and idem: Tlie Spurious and the Authentic (above, n.2), pp.2I- 22, and Avicenna (above, n.8), pp. 200-204, with reference to Aristotle, Sophistical Refutations 184a), Antony has that of a writing-board and table.
Cf E.Riad: Studies in the Syriac Preface. In: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.
Studia Semitica Upsaliensia II. Uppsala, 1988, pp.208-2I0, 218.
" One might compare the similarly immodest claims of Michael Psellos to have revived philosophy by his own efforts, unaided by any teachers worthy of mention
(Chronographia 6, 37), and to have discovered the ancient sources choked up,
opening and cleansing them himself and bringing their hidden waters to the sur¬
face (ibid. 42).
" Cf Watt: Syriac Rhetorical Theory (above, n.26); idem: Antony of Tagrit on
Rhetorical Figures. In: IV. Symposium Syriacum, ed. H.J.W. Druvers et al.,
Orientalia Christiana Analecta 229. Rome, 1987, pp.317-325.
Grammar, Rhetoric, and the Enlcyklios Paideia in Syriac 55
theless held that in the case of logic and the prolegomena to
philosophy, this was filled with older Syriac content."' This also
applies to the sections on grammar, rhetoric, and poetics. Merx
recognised that Bar Shakko's treatment of grammar depended on
earlier Greek and Syriac contributions to the subject."" The seven
parts of speech, for example, which he laid down at the start of
his work, are those of Dionysius Thrax, less the article."' In the
case of rhetoric and poetics, the Syriac source of his work is even
clearer. It is not only the triad 'grammar, rhetoric, and poetics'
which he shares with Antony of Tagrit; most of the dialogue on
rhetoric is an epitome of Antony's Rhetoric, Book I,"* while that
on poetics is taken from Antony's Book V."' In the fourth dia¬
logue, on the copiousness of Syriac, Merx noted his dependence
on Antony and on the Syriac version of Homer."* The First Book
of Bar Shakko's Dialogues is therefore a late Syriac form of the
technical aspect of the literary side of the enkyklios paideia, but
based largely on earlier Syriac material. We must now compare
this earlier material with the corresponding parts of the Hellenis¬
tic system.
i|c 3): :ic
The education in 'grammar and rhetoric' provided by Hellenis¬
tic grammarians covered three principal areas. Technical gram¬
mar {methodike), which comprised morphology and sometimes
metrics, supplemented the original and always pre-eminent 'his¬
torical' part of the subject {historike), the reading and interpreta-
" Baumstark: Aristoteles, pp. 182-184.
" Merx: Historia, pp.214-215.
Ibid., pp.9 and 215/Syriac texts pp.50 and 2.
" Cf. J. Bendrat: Der Dialog iiber die Rhetorik des Jakob bar Shakko. In: Paul de Lagarde und die syrische Kirchengesehichte, hrsg. vom Göttinger Arbeitskreis für syrische Kirchengesehichte. Göttingen, 1968, pp. 19-26. Apart from his sec¬
tions on preaching, feasts, and consolation (questions 18-21) and epistolography (questions 22-26), the dialogue is for the most part an epitome of Antony's Rhe¬
toric I, 2-8; 16-21; 28-30.
Cf. Watt: Fifth Book (Text), pp.xviii-xx. Most of the twenty-one questions reproduce material from Antony, but question 20 is the celebrated citation from the Syriac version of Aristotle's Poetics 6, 1449 b 24-1450 a 9, published by D. Mar¬
goliouth: Analecta orientalia ad Poeticam Aristoteleam. London, 1887, pp. 77-79 (Arabic sequence).
Cf Merx: Historia, pp.2I0-211.
tion of the 'classics', especially the poets, and above all Homer.
The elementary stages of composition represented in the first few
exercises of the rhetorical progymnasmata"' rounded off this
course of study.'"
In Latin education, the curriculum was very similar. Latin poets
and prose writers were read in place of Greek, although Homer
could also be read in Latin translation. Technical grammar and
elementary composition were based on the Greek models, and
taught from translations and adaptations of the Grammar of
Dionysius Thrax and the progymnasmata."
The line dividing secondary from higher education was by no
means fixed and stable, especially in the area of rhetoric, and the
tasks of the grammatikos and the rhetor were therefore not strictly
separated. Quintilian observed that 'subjects which once
formed the first stages of rhetoric have come to
form the final stages of a literary education'," and
noted that among the Greeks pupils began studying with the
rhetor while still working with the grammatikos.^^ In Rhodes in
the 1st century B.C., Aristodemus of Nysa taught rhetoric in the
morning and grammar in the afternoon,''* while the so-called
'University of Constantinople', organised in 425 A.D., contained
grammarians as well as teachers of higher education." The early
exercises of the progymnasmata are 'the subjects which
once formed the first stages of rhetoric'. All the ex¬
tant progymnasmata deal with the same set of exercises (with only
minor variations) - fable, narrative, anecdote, sentence, refuta¬
tion, confirmation, commonplace, encomium, vituperation, com¬
parison, characterisation, description, thesis, and introduction of
a law - and Quintilian indicates that the grammarian might deal
with about the first six of them, at least to the extent that their
Four ofthe Greek progymnasmata are extant: Theon, ed. L. Spengel: Rhetores Graeci II. Leipzig, 1854; [Hermogenes], ed. H.Rabe: Hermogenis Opera, Rhetores Graeci Vl. Leipzig, 1913; Aphthonius, ed. H.Rabe: Aphthonii Progymnasmata Rhetores Graeci X. loipzig, 1926; and Nicolaus, ed. J. Felten: Nicolai Progym¬
nasmata, Rhetores Graeci XI. Leipzig, 1913.
" Cf Marrou: Histoire (above, n.5), pp. 243-264.
Cf. ibid., pp. 400-41 1.
" Quintilian II, 1,3 (transi. H.E.Butler, in the Loeb edition, vol. I, p. 205).
» Cf ibid., 12-13.
" Cf Marrou: Histoire, p. 243.
" Cf. C. Mango: Byzantium. The Empire of New Rome. London, 1980, p. 130.
Grammar, Rhetoric, and the Enkyklios Paideia in Syriac 57
material could be derived from the poets.'* The rest were in prin¬
ciple reserved for the rhetorician, who began his course with the
more advanced exercises of the progymnasmata; the later stages
of higher rhetorical education were devoted mainly to judicial and
(to a lesser extent) deliberative oratory, based on stasis theory."
As has already been indicated, there is no doubt at all that
technical grammar became a subject of serious study in Syriac,
and that the Syrians' work in this field shows the Greek influence
in their analysis and classification of the parts of speech (above,
pp.198, 203). In connection with enkyklios paideia, it is particu¬
larly interesting to note that Antony of Tagrit {Rhetoric I, 26)
devotes a chapter to the use of grammar in rhetoric, emphasising
in particular the importance of knowing the etymology both of
common and of rare (ancient or poetic) words, and of or¬
namenting speech with foreign words. In these matters, he advises
the student to study glosses and translations into Syriac from other
languages, but he also warns that the unusual words are only to
be used sparingly. Correct usage of the various parts of speech,
he adds, is also important for the orator. The same concerns of
the rhetor in the matter of the teaching of grammar are already
evident in Quintilian."
As for metre, the only extant Syriac treatments prior to those of
the Maronites in Europe are the discussion in Antony's Rhetoric,
Book V (pp. 9-52), and its epitome in Bar Shakko's Dialogues.^^
Antony claims to be the first to treat Syriac metre in a methodical
manner, but for the reasons given above, we should probably be
somewhat sceptical of his claim to originality. Be that as it may,
the great quantity of Syriac literature in verse shows that at least
some practical instruction in metre was widely available from
early times. Antony himself provides a course of instruction,
which takes the student from the simplest to the most complicated
" Quintilian 1, 9,1-6; 11, 4,2; 18.
" The Byzantine rhetorical corpus consisted of Progymnasmata (usually of Aph¬
thonius) and the four treatises of (or attributed to) Hermogenes, namely. On
Staseis, Invention, Ideas, and Metltod. Cf G.A.Kennedy: Greelc Rhetoric under Christian Emperors. Princeton, 1983, pp.54, 102-103.
" I, 4-7, esp. 5, Iff ; 34 ff.; 55 ff; 6, 28ff Correctness and ornateness were two of the Theophrastan 'virtues of style'; cf. F. Solmsen: Tlie Aristotelian Tradition in Ancient Rhetoric. In: American Journal of Philology 62 (1941), pp. 43-44, 181-185.
" The latter published by M. L'abbe Martin: De la metrique chez les Syriens.
In: AKM VII, 2. Leipzig, 1879; repr. Liechtenstein, 1966.
of metres, with many examples of his own making. One of these,
demonstrating six-syllable verse, is of interest here:
The root of education is bitter at the beginning,
but sweet at the end
when it has brought fruits (V, p. 13).
This famous chreia ('The root of education is bitter,
but its fruits are sweet') appears both in Greek (Aph¬
thonius) and Latin (Diomedes) pedagogic texts, attributed to
Isocrates and the elder Cato respectively.*" It looks as if it also
found its way into Syriac education.
It is much more difficult to establish whether or not the pre¬
eminent part ofthe Greek or Latin grammarian's task, the reading
of 'classical' literature, especially poetry, also existed in some
form in Syriac education. The study of poetry and literature, how¬
ever, was an essential preparation for that of rhetoric, at least in
classical antiquity and in Byzantium.*' In the Inst. Orat., for ex¬
ample, Quintilian devotes considerable space to the question of
which authors should be read by the aspiring orator, and how he
may derive profit from them.*^ If, therefore, we find that in his
Rhetoric, Antony draws on poets or prose writers for examples of
eloquent speech, it is not unreasonable to assume that these works
would already be familiar to students. There is no doubt that
among the Syrians - as indeed among the Byzantines - the read¬
ing of the Bible and patristic literature replaced, to some extent,
that of Homer and pagan poets and orators,*' and it is interesfing
to note that Antony appends to his discussion of figures a set of
biblical examples.** However, if we are not to lose all meaningful
connection with the old enkyklios paideia, under 'classical litera¬
ture' we must in the first place consider works of pagan antiquity,
although Christian works of comparable literary quality (e.g., the
orations of Gregory of Nazianzus) can be added. We must also
" Cf. Marrou: Histoire, pp. 262-263 and 410-411. The saying is also found in
various forms in many Greek and Arabic gnomologia; cf Gutas: Greek Wisdom
Literature (above, n.3), pp. 392-393.
" In the medieval West, there was a tendency to keep the artes and discard the auctores; cf. Norden: Antike Kunstprosa (above, n.5), pp. 688-693.
" Quintilian I, 8; II, 5; IX, 1-2.
" Cf Merx: Historia, pp. 1-4.
" Book V, pp. 69-7 1. See also ibid., pp.57 and 66.
Grammar, Rhetoric, and the Enlcyklios Paideia in Syriac 59
give pride of place to poetry," and by analogy with the Latin
situation, can also include original Syriac works, especially
poetry.
As Antony devoted a chapter to the usefulness of grammar for
rhetoric, so also he devoted one (I, 25) to poetry, in which he
observed that those who rendered Greek metrical compositions
into Syriac mostly'made them straight' (/Ji/vv, rendered into
prose?)'for rhetorical reading'(/-^/y/j'r/iy/rv'). He ended
the chapter by quoting Syriac versions of poems of Gregory of
Nazianzus, Iliad 19, If., Evodius(?)," and Ephraim(!). This evi¬
dently indicates that Greek poetry was indeed read in Syriac
translation, and was valued 'for rhetorical reading'. An¬
tony never refers to himself as a translator, and it is striking that
all the presently identifiable Greek works cited in his treatise are
known to have existed in Syriac translations made prior to the
ninth century." It seems therefore very probable that Antony was
no Hunain, able to draw directly from the Greek or educated on
Greek soil, but rather that the grammatical, literary, and rhetori¬
cal knowledge which he possessed had already been translated
into Syriac when it reached him.
From classical antiquity to Byzantium, Homer dominated
Greek education, and no more eloquent testimony can be found
to the influence of that form of education in the Syro-Meso¬
potamian sphere than the translation of the Iliad into Syriac and
the numerous citations from it in Antony's Rhetoricf^ The Homer
quotations of Antony and Bar Shakko are presumably taken from
the translation made in the eighth century by Theophilus of
" Epic was naturally foremost in Greek and Latin education, on account of Homer, but all poetic genres were represented. Cf. Quintilian X, 1, 56-72; 85-100.
Cf H. Raguse: Syrische Homerzitate in der Rhetorik des Anton von Tagrit. In:
Lagarde (above, n.46), pp. 171-173. The text cited by Antony is that translated by Raguse, p. 173, 'das sicherlich nicht von Homer stammt'. For the preceding Iliad citation, cf ibid., p. 165, no. 5.
" Cf Raguse: ibid., pp. 167-168; 173; W. Strothmann : Die Schrift des Anton von Tagrit iiber die Rhetorik. In: Lagarde, p. 209; Watt: Fifth Book (Translation), pp. xvii-xx.
" Cf. Raguse: Syrische Homerzitate, pp. 162-175, who identified ten citations from the Iliad and four from the Odyssey. Many of them are from Antony's section on poetic figures {gbulye, schemata) in Book V, pp.53-71. The doctrine of figures was one of the most notable areas of overlap between the work ofthe grammatikos and the rhetor.
Edessa, which is not otherwise preserved.*' That such a manifestly
non-Christian (and non-philosophical) text occupied the attention
of the Syrians, can only be explained by the influence of Hellenis¬
tic secondary education, of which Homer was the foundation. We
may imagine that as long as the bilingualism of (upper class)
Syrian education persisted. Homer would have been read in
Greek, but that when Greek had become unintelligible to the
majority of these students, a Syriac version became necessary to
preserve the character of the enkyklios paideia J° About a century
before Theophilus, Athanasius of Balad, illustrating non-apo-
phantic forms of speech, cited the Iliad, presumably directly from
the Greek." The works of Greek literature read in Syriac transla¬
tion from the ninth century were therefore possibly only a selec¬
tion of those known in the original to the bilingual Graeco-Syriac
scholars of the preceding centuries.
Antony also gives us valuable information on how Homer was
interpreted and taught. Writing about the figurative language em¬
ployed in Iliad 20, 67-73 (the battle of the gods), he adds:
'See', said to me my instructor [//•" equivalent to grammati-
kos/exegetesl] in this when interpreting [gly^yt 'bd, equiva¬
lent to exegeisthail] (it), 'that virtues and vices arise against
each other, for (the Greeks) considered Ares to be senseless
and stupid, Athena wisdom and prudence, Leto forgetful er¬
ror, and Hermes memory and reason. But (Homer) also tou¬
ches on natural things and narrates the separation ofthe ele¬
ments from each other, saying, "Against Poseidon arose king
Apollo," which (means that) the sun (arose) against watery
nature, (while) Artemis is the moon and Hera air' (V, p. 67).
This is exactly the interpretation, in terms of the physical ele¬
ments and the virtues and vices, found in the Homeric scholia to
" Cf. Raguse: ibid. While Bar Shakko took over some of Antony's citations, he also added others, e.g., II. 6, 325, and Od. 18, 26 (cf Raguse, p. 162), which shows that he also knew the translation independently of the text of Antony.
" Cf above, p. 198, n.22.
" Cf G. Furlani : Una introduzione alla logica Aristotelica di Atanasio di Balad.
In: Rendiconti della Reale Academia dei Lincei. Classe di Scienze morali, storiche e filologiche, Ser. V, vol. 25 (1917), pp.732f (text)/769 (translation). The passages cited are I, 37f (precative); I, 335f (vocative); I, 337f (imperative); and 16, 7f.
(interrogative).
Grammar, Rhetoric, and the Enkyklios Paideia in Syriac 61
this passage." The allegorical interpretation of the Greek
grammarians was evidently transferred unchanged across the lin¬
guistic boundary.
The only other Greek poet quoted by Antony is Gregory of
Nazianzus," but Antony knows a great deal of Syriac poetry.
Early Syriac grammarians would have been in a somewhat anal¬
ogous situation with respect to their native poetry as their early
Latin counterparts, and it is not surprising that Latin grammar¬
ians were open to the study of'modern' poets, given the relatively
recent origins of Latin poetry in comparison with Greek.'* Not
surprisingly, Ephraim is the Syriac poet most frequently quoted
by Antony, although he is also familiar with Aswana, Balai, Isaac
of Antioch, and Jacob of Sarug, in addition to a great number of
anonymous or unidentified poems." It may be significant that
some of this anonymous or unidentified verse, as far as one can
judge from excerpts, seems in general to be more secular than that
of the famous theologians, even if infused with Christian ele¬
ments.'* The early Syriac grammarians may have had a consider¬
able amount of secular, pagan, or (as judged by later standards)
'heretical' material to work on, such as the poetry of Bardaisän;
Antony cites a brief passage in verse from an unknown Wap(h)a,
whom he describes as an ancient Aramaic (i.e., presumably
" Scholia graeca in Homeri Uiadem, ed. W.Dindorf. Oxford, 1875-1877, II, p. 195, 9-14; IV, p. 231, 12-30. Cf [Plutarch], De vita et poesi Homeri 102, ed.
G. Bernardakis, Moralia VII. Leipzig, 1896, pp.383-384; [Heraclitel, Problemes
Homeriques 54-58, ed. F. Buffiere. Paris, 1962, pp. 62-65; Porphyry, Quaest.
Homer, ad 11. pert., ed H. Schräder. Leipzig, 1880-1882, pp.240-243.
" Cf. Antony, Rhetoric I, 25; V, pp. 58-59. Gregory's poems (as also his ora¬
tions, see below) were translated more than once into Syriac; cf. Baumstark:
Geschichte, pp. 77 f., 259, 276. The mysterious Evodius may also be added here;
cf. above, p. 207.
Cf Marrou : Histoire, pp. 368-369, 404-406.
" Rhetoric V, esp. pp. 32-52, 58-61.
" As a striking example, see the 'Dispute of the Months', now edited by
S.P. Brock: A Dispute of the Months and some related Syriac texts. In: JSS 30
(1985), pp. 181-211, and cited by Antony as an example of prosopopoeia in Rhe¬
toric V, p. 60. Brock suggests a date around the fifth or sixth century for this poem, and observes that 'the Syriac dispute ofthe months represents an interesting fusion of two originally separate genres, the precedence dispute, and the ekphrasis or description, the one essentially Mesopotamian, the other Greek' (p. 184). It was therefore ideal material for a Syriac grammarian, especially as the Mesopotamian precedence dispute involved personification, which was also, of course, a Greek rhetorical technique. Cf. below, p. 211
pagan) philosopher (V, pp.39; 43-44). Christian rehgious poetry
was probably of less direct interest to the early grammarians,
although it is an area in which the bilingualism of late antique
Syria is very evident, with influences operating in both directions
across the linguistic boundary." However, by the time of Antony,
and quite probably long before that, Ephraim had clearly become
the dominant 'classical' Syriac poet.
The principal prose authors studied in Greek and Latin schools
were the orators and historians. Syriac translations are extant of
Isocrates, To Demonicus, and Themistius, On Friendship, and On
Virtue. In scholarly works on the history of Syriac literature, these
translations are always classified under the heading of popular
philosophy or ethics,'* and it is clearly quite Hkely that this was
how they were viewed by their translators and readers; but it is
also possible that they could have been studied by Syriac
grammarians and rhetors from the literary and rhetorical perspec¬
tive. The same applies to the orations of the Christian preachers
Gregory of Nazianzus, Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, and
John Chrysostom, which were rendered into Syriac" and could
have been utilised by Syriac grammarians and rhetors as well as
theologians. Antony of Tagrit calls Gregory not only by his familiar
title of'The Theologian', but also designates him 'Prince of rhetors
and Chief of sophists';*" in Syriac, as among the Byzantines, Gre¬
gory was clearly, so to speak, the 'Christian Demosthenes',*' and
Antony draws on him and Basil for examples of figures of speech
(V, pp.55, 58-59, 62). The only Greek 'historian' known to have
been translated (from Pahlavi) into Syriac was Pseudo-Cal-
listhenes.*2 Even in the eighth or ninth century, it is difficult to
conceive of this work as a Syriac grammarian's 'substitute' for
Herodotus or Thucydides, but Antony draws from it examples of
metaphor and irony (V, pp. 65, 68). Finally on the question of'clas¬
sical literature', we may note that if the Christian Syrians were
" Cf. s.P. Brock: From Ephrem to Romanos. In: E.A. Livingstone (ed.), Studia Patristica XX. Louvain, 1989, pp. 139-151.
" Cf Baumstark: Geschichte, p. 169; Brock: From Antagonism to Assimilation, pp. 26-27.
" Cf. Baumstark: Geschichte, pp. 77-81, 190; cf pp.276-277.
"o Rhetoric V, pp. 55, 58, 62, 66, and frequently in Books I-IV.
" Cf. Norden: Antike Kunstprosa (above, n.5), pp.562-569; Kennedy: Greek Rhetoric (above, n.57), pp. 215-239, 286, 293-293, 305, 308, 311-312.
" Cf. Baumstark: Geschichte, p. 125.
Grammar, Rhetoric, and the Enkyklios Paideia in Syriac 63
worried about the pagan elements in some of the works they were
studying, like the Byzantines they could turn to Basil's treatise On
the Value of Greek Literature (in Syriac translation)*' for guidance.
The final part of the grammarian's task, which merged into that
of the rhetor's, was the teaching of the preliminary exercises in
composition which form part of the rhetorical progymnasmata.
According to Quintilian I, 9, 1-3, these rudiments of oratory
should include the paraphrasing of Aesop's fables and the writing
of sentences, anecdotes, and character sketches. These corre¬
spond to the progymnastic exercises of fable {muthos), sentence
{gnome), anecdote {chreia), and characterisation or personifica¬
tion {ethopoeia, prosopopoeia). In his section on poetic figures,
Antony provides model examples of matlä (fable and narrative),
peletä (sentence and anecdote), and 'bidüt parsöpä (personifica¬
tion or characterisation). Aesop's fables are the prime example of
the first, Pythagorean sentences of the second, and Homer and
some Syriac poems ofthe third (V, pp. 55-62). This section there¬
fore corresponds quite closely to the preliminary rhetorical mate¬
rial treated by the Greek grammarians.*"
Syriac texts on grammar and rhetoric thus point clearly to the
survival among the Syrians of the teaching of technical grammar
and elementary composition. Furthermore, it is not unreasonable
to deduce, from the evidence in Antony's Rhetoric ofthe study of
Homer and other pagan and Christian poetry and oratory, that
the core of the grammarian's teaching, the reading and explana¬
tion of 'classical' literature, also became in some form part of
Syriac education. We may conclude with some confidence that
poetry, grammar, and rhetoric, i.e., the literary side of the enky¬
klios paideia, was fostered in certain circles among the Syrians, at
least to the time of Antony of Tagrit,*' and its basic structure still
" Cf. ibid., p. 78.
" For a fuller treatment of this section, cf my Antony of Tagrit on Rhetorical Figures (above, n.42).
I have not attempted here to trace the influence of rhetorical education on
Syriac literature (cf above, n.28), nor endeavoured to deduce from this the
chronological development of rhetorical education in Syriac prior to Antony. An
interesting start in this direction has been made by K.E. McVey: The Memrä on
the Life of Severus of Antioch composed by George, Bishop of the Arab Tribes.
Unpublished dissertation: Harvard University, 1977. She does not consider the reading of Homer to have been central in the process, but in many other respects her suggestions are consistent with mine.
survived in the time of Bar Shakko. From the extant Syriac trans¬
lations and original writings, it is undoubtedly true that their in¬
terest in Greek logic and science stands out more prominently
than that in literature and rhetoric. But the old Hellenistic ideal
of a classical literary and rhetorical education also lived on, al¬
though doubtless in a much attenuated and somewhat changed
form, either as an end in itself, or as a preparation for philosophi¬
cal, medical, or theological studies.
* * *
Finally, turning briefly to the subject of secular higher educa¬
tion - while bearing in mind that the distinction between second¬
ary and higher education may well have tended to disappear, as
it did in Byzantium** - we must first note that the schools provid¬
ing this in Syriac also taught theology." The most famous of the
old schools, that of the Persians in Edessa, was in existence as
early as the fifth century, but it is doubtful if anything other than
theology was studied there.** Higher education requires advanced
texts, and higher education through Syriac was therefore scarcely
possible before the sixth century. Sergius of Reshaina (d. 536) was
the first translator of Aristotelian philosophy into Syriac, and it
has been suggested that Mar Aba (d.552) was instrumental in
introducing this learning to the East Syrian church, although
Sergius' influence was by no means limited to the West.*'
If we begin by again seeking first to gain an overall view of the
subjects of the curriculum, for the West Syrian schools we have
the late evidence not only of the Dialogues of Bar Shakko, but
also that ofhis near contemporary. Bar Hebraeus (d. 1286). In his
Nomocanon, Bar Hebraeus enumerated, after the Biblical and
patristic writings, the 'outside' (i.e., secular) studies which he
thought should be pursued in the schools:
" Cf. Mango: Byzantium (above, n. 55), p. 147.
8' Cf. J.-B. Chabot: L'ecole de Nisibe. In: JA 9, 8 (1896), pp. 43-93, esp. pp.64-
68; M. Meverhof: Von Alexandrien nach Bagdad. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des
philosophischen und medizinischen Unterrichts bei den Arabern. In: Sitzb. d. Preuss.
Akad. d. Wiss., Phil.-hist. KJ. Berlin, 1930, pp.389-429, esp. pp. 400-405; A. Vöö¬
bus : History of the School of Nisibis (above, n. 25), pp. 104-105; J. B. Segal: Edessa (above, n. 10), p. 150.
" Cf. Brock: From Antagonism to Assimilation, pp. 21-22.
" Ibid., pp. 21-22, 26. On Probus, cf above, n.2I.
Grammar, Rhetoric, and the Enkyklios Paideia in Syriac 65
From the outside studies, the book of Antony of Tagrit [i. e.,
the Rhetoric], the logical (books) of Aristotle - Categories, On
Interpretation, Analytics, Apodeictics, the eight books of 7b-
pics, Sophistical Refutations, Poetics, and the three books on
Rhetoric - and the four mathematical (disciplines) provide
elegance for the tongue and discipline for the mind. But from
physics and metaphysics it is only necessary to take what is
profitable, as we have done in our book The Candelabrum of
the Sanctuary and the little Book of Rays, with disputation
and controversy against their writers who knew God but did
not honour him as God.'°
The study of rhetoric, logic, and the four mathematical disci¬
plines was thus encouraged without qualification; physics and
metaphysics, since they could clash with Christian theology, had
to be treated more critically. Thus according to Bar Hebraeus'
design, the curriculum of the enkyklios paideia continued into
higher education as propaideutic to (theologically controlled)
physics and metaphysics. The only 'liberal art' missing from his
list is grammar, which in principle belonged wholly to secondary
education," and the 'historical' side of which had by his time
possibly become almost completely ecclesiastical and limited
to the reading of the Bible and the church fathers (cf above,
p. 206).
From the perspective of contemporary scholarship, the most
problematic case is again that of rhetoric. Bar Hebraeus himself
did not write on the subject,'^ but the fact that he knew Antony's
'° P. Bedjan (ed.): Nomocanon Gregorii Barhebraei 7, 9. Paris/Leipzig, 1898, p. 106, 11. 3-13. The emendation of 'mathematics' by J.S. Assemani: Bibliotheca
Orientalis 111, 2. Rome, 1728, p. 938, followed by J. Ruska: Studien zu Severus bar Sakkü's "Buch der Dialoge". In: ZA 12 (1897), p. 40, n.3, or its deletion by Merx:
Historia, p.3, seems to me quite unnecessary. Nor do I understand why Ruska
was so sure that the 'four mathematics' did not refer to the quadrivium; the 'book of Antony of Tagrit' and the 'logical (books) of Aristotle' clearly cover two of the three subjects of the trivium.
" Bar Hebraeus himself, of course, wrote extensively on technical grammar, drawing on both Syriac and Arabic predecessors. Cf Merx : Historia, pp. 229-269;
Baumstark: Geschichte, p. 317; A. Moberg: Buch der Strahlen. Die größere Gram¬
matik des Barhebräus. Leipzig, 1907-13; idem: Le livre des splendeurs. La grande
grammaire de Gregoire Barhebraeus. Lund, 1922.
'2 He did write a commentary on Aristotle's Rhetoric in the Cream of Wisdom, where the Rhetoric is considered to be Aristotle's eighth book of logic (cf Baum-
Rhetoric^^ and included it in his Hst in the Nomocanon is clear
evidence that he considered the subject to be part of the cur¬
riculum.'" As we have observed, in Hellenistic-Roman times the
rhetor usually began his teaching with the more advanced exer¬
cises of the progymnasmata, before taking up stasis theory and
judicial and (in principle) deliberative rhetoric. The theory ofthe
third species of oratory, epideictic, was covered in the progym¬
nastic exercises of encomium and vituperation, but although in
practice epideictic provided the greatest opportunities for elo¬
quent speech, little attention was paid to it at the higher levels of
rhetorical study. The basis of the influential handbook of
Menander Rhetor on epideictic speeches was the progymnastic
encomium."
Antony's Rhetoric devotes far more attention to epideictic than
to judicial or deliberative rhetoric. We have already seen that in
Book Five he has a section on figures, which is similar to some
of the early progymnastic exercises in composition. In Book One
he devotes considerable attention to the sources of praise and
blame (I, 4-5), and his disposition of a speech of praise (I, 28)
stark: Geschichle, p. 316, and see the inclusion of the Rhetoric in the logical works of Aristotle in the text from the Nomocanon, cited above). This is the only known Syriac commentary on Aristotle's Rhetoric, and an edition ofthis text is a desider¬
atum; it may be the case that it contains interesting material on rhetoric as well as logic. However, according to the investigations of D. Margoliouth: Analecta Orientalia (above, n.47), pp. 43-44, Bar Hebraeus drew heavily on Avicenna. It would therefore be necessary to 'filter out' the influence of Avicenna to ascertain whether it gives us any insight into the history of the Syriac interpretation of Aristotle's Rhetoric, or the history of Syriac rhetorical theory. It is worth noting
here, however, the assessment of Avicenna's commentary by J. Langhade and
M. Grignaschi: Deux ouvrages inedits sur la Rethorique [sic]. Beirut, I97I, pp.25- 26: 'Avicenne vise beaucoup plus [than al-Färäbi] ä fournir des elements de travail aux orateurs, s'interesse au discours proprement dit ...'
" He quoted it twenty-four times in his Grammar. Cf Strothmann (above, n.67), pp. 206-207.
For a similar formulation from a Byzantine, cf. Michael Psellus, Chrono¬
graphia 6,36: 'My efforts were concentrated on two objects: to train my tongue
by rhetoric, and to refine my mind by a course of philosophy' (transi.
E. R. A. Sewter: The Chronographia of Michael Psellus. London, 1953, p. 127).
« Cf D.A. Russell and N.G.Wilson: Menander Rhetor. Oxford, 1981, pp.xxv-
xxxi; Kennedy: Greek Rhetoric, pp.63, 68-70. The triple division of oratory (ju¬
dical, deliberative, epideictic), first attested in Aristotle (Rhetoric I, 3), had a lasting impact on rhetorical theory, although the development of rhetorical theory was largely confined to the judicial. Cf F. Solmsen: The Aristotelian Tradition in Ancient Rhetoric (above n.58), pp. 180-181.
Grammar, Rhetoric, and the Enkyklios Paideia in Syriac 67
corresponds quite closely to that of the progymnastic encomium.'*
By contrast, he gives only a very brief account of judicial and
deliberative speeches (I, 6-7). Thus comparing his treatise to the
late Greek and Byzantine rhetorical corpus of the Progymnasmata
and the Ars of Hermogenes, Antony's Rhetoric covers much of
the ground belonging to the former, but not that of the latter, of
which the first and most important part was stasis theory.
However, the first three chapters (the Prolegomena) of Antony's
work do not at all lead us to expect that rhetoric is largely to be
confined to epideictic. In chapter three he makes the usual tripar¬
tite division of the genera (praise/blame, persuasion/dissuasion,
accusation/defence), and his treatment ofthe latter two, however
brief, suggests that they were not entirely outside the range of the
Syrians' interest." The question therefore arises as to whether the
Syrians ever had a textbook for the theory of judicial and delibera¬
tive rhetoric, the content of which was of a more advanced nature
than that of Antony's, as in Greek the Progymnasmata led on to
the Ars of Hermogenes. There is no evidence of any Syriac trans¬
lation of Hermogenes, but there is evidence for the translation of
one other Greek rhetorical treatise, namely, the Rhetoric of Aris¬
totle. In late antiquity, Greek Neoplatonic philosophers con¬
sidered this to be part of the Organon, '* while rhetoricians Uiade
little or no use of it, preferring Hermogenes. Since judicial and
deliberative rhetoric was considered a logical art," there is in
principle no reason why it could not have served as a textbook
for advanced rhetoric, even although it was considered part of the
Organon, but in practice the long tradition of stasis theory (intro¬
duced into Greek rhetoric in Hellenistic times) seems to have led
" Cf. Watt: Syriac Panegyric (above, n.28), pp. 274-285.
" Idem: Syriac Rhetorical Theory (above, n.26).
'* Cf R. Walzer: Zur Tradilionsgeschichte der aristotelischen Poetik. In: Greek into Arabic. Oxford, 1962, pp. 129-136. There was an older classification, in which the Rhetoric and the Poetics appeared under 'productive treatises'. Cf P. Moraux:
Les listes anciennes des ouvrages d'Aristote. Louvain, 1951, esp. pp. 96-104, 172- 183. This classification appears in Ptolemy's Catalogue, which was translated into Syriac and Arabic; cf. Baumstark: Aristoteles, pp.53-104, esp. pp.73, 101.
" E.g., Sopatros called rhetoric a logical art (C. Walz: Rhetores Graeci V,
p. 1,1) and agreed with Porphyry and Minucianus that the study of it can be
limited to the examination of judicial and deliberative rhetoric (ibid., pp.9, 14-11, 20). Cf. the opening statement of Aristotle's Rhetoric: 'rhetoric is an antistrophos to dialectic'.
to the neglect of Aristotle's Rhetoric by Greek rhetoricians."* In
Syriac, however, there was presumably no tradition of stasis
theory, and it seems therefore quite possible that the Syrians read
Aristotle's Rhetoric as a work on rhetorical theory, even if
they also considered it - as does Bar Hebraeus in his Nomocanon
and Cream of Wisdom - to be part of the Organon?^^
In late antiquity, the old rivalry between rhetoric and philos¬
ophy was giving way to cooperation.'"^ Whether or not the Syrians
used Aristotle's Rhetoric as a textbook for rhetoric, from the sixth
century they certainly studied logic from Porphyry's Eisagoge and
the first three books {Categories, On Interpretation, and Prior Ana¬
lytics to I, 7) of the Organon. Syriac activity in this area is well
known, and it is sufficient to note here that there was a continuous
tradition of Syriac work on Aristotelian logic from the time of
Sergius of Reshaina to the tenth century,'"' upheld in the second
millenium by Dionysius Bar Salibi, Jacob Bar Shakko, and Bar
Hebraeus.'"" In the scheme of study of the Alexandrian interpret¬
ers of Aristotle, logic was linked to his theoretical (physics-mathe¬
matics-metaphysics) and practical (ethics-oeconomics-politics)
philosophy, but apart from Sergius' version of the Pseudo-Aris¬
totelian De mundo^°^ (and excluding the supposed Pseudo-Aris-
Olympiodorus, although he considered Aristotle's Poetics to be part of the Organon, and from the perspective of logic therefore believed that Aristotle only dealt with the poetic syllogism in order that his followers might avoid it (cf.
Prolegomena et In Categorias commentarium, ed. A. Busse: Comm. in Arist.
Graeca 12,1. Berlin 1920, p. 8, 19-27), also considered that the Poetics established 'the poetic method'. In principle, therefore, he could also have considered that the Rhetoric established 'the rhetorical method', but in fact he assigned this role not to Aristotle's, but to Hermogenes' Rhetoric. Cf ibid., p. 18, 7-10: 'Homer and Demosthenes needed neither Aristotle's Poetics nor Hermogenes' Ars (Rlietorica), but rather (Aristotle and Hermogenes) needed their writings in order to establish the (poetic and rhetorical) methods' (cited by D. Gutas: Paul the Persian (above, n.39), p. 258).
Cf Watt: Syriac Rlielorical Theory (above, n.26), for fuller discussion of this question.
'"Cf Kennedy: Greek Rhetoric (above, n.57), pp. 73-79, 105-115.
'°' The material to the eighth century is reviewed in Brock: From Antagonism to Assimilation, pp. 21-26. For a survey ofthe logicians active in Baghdad in the following two centuries, cf N. Rescher: Tlte Development of Arabic Logic. Pitts¬
burgh, 1964, pp. 22-39.
Cf Baumstark: Geschichte, pp.298, 312, 316f
'"Text: P. DE Lagarde: Analecta Syriaca. Leipzig/Berlin, 1858, pp. 134-158.
Translations: v. Ryssel: Über den textkritischen Werth der syrischen Übersetzungen
I
Grammar, Rhetoric, and the Enkyklios Paideia in Syriac 69
totelian De amma^°^), we have no certain evidence for the com-
! plete translation of any other than his logical works until the
period of Hunain. The Alexandrian scheme of study is reflected,
however, with more or less completeness, in Paul the Persian,""
Antony of Tagrit,'"* Ms. Vat. Syr. 158 and the Syriac logic com¬
pendium used by Bar Shakko, "» Bar Zobi,"" Bar Shakko's Dia-
logues,^^^ and Bar Hebraeus' Nomocanon and Cream of Wis-
dom.^^^ There may possibly have been old (pre-Hunain) Syriac
. translations of the Physica and the Liber Animalium, and parts of
the Metaphysica were known to Bud and Jacob of Edessa.'"
From the mathematical disciplines, astronomy (including geo¬
graphy and astrology) seems to have been the only one intensively
i studied in Syriac before the ninth century. The subject interested
Bardaisän,"" while Sergius of Reshaina wrote a treatise 'On the
influence of the moon'"' and perhaps also that 'On the movement
of the sun'."* The outstanding Syriac author in this field, how-
' ever, was Severus Sebokt, from whose hand may also come the
griechischer Klassiker I. Leipzig, 1880, pp. 4-48; II, 1881, pp. 1-29; G. Furlani in:
Rivista di Studi Filosofici et Religiosi 4 (1923), pp. 1-22.
Cf. B. Einarson : On a Supposed Pseudo-Aristotelian Treatise on the Soul. In : Classical Philology 28 (1933), pp. 129-130, who observes that the treatise was transmitted anonymously in Greek and Syriac, in addition to being attributed (in
Greek) to Gregory Thaumaturgus and Maximus the Confessor, and (in Syriac) to
Aristotle.
Cf D. Gutas: Paul the Persian (above, n.39), pp.231-250, 261-265.
Cf Watt: Syriac Rhetoric Theory (above, n.26).
Cf Baumstark: Aristoteles, pp. 171-202.
Cf. H. Daiber: Semitische Sprachen als Kulturvermittler zwischen Antike und Mittelalter In: ZDMG 136 (1986), pp.301-302. Unfortunately, C.Hein: Defmition und Einteilung der Philosophie. Europäische Hochschulsehriften XX, 177. Frank-
furt/Bem/New York, 1985, was not avaüable to me. Cf also Daiber in: OC 69
(1985), pp. 73-80.
Cf above, p. 200.
"2 Cf. Baumstark: Geschichte, p.316 for the Cream of Wisdom; and for the Nomocanon, see above, pp. 212-213.
Cf. F.E.Peters: Aristoteles Arabus. Leiden, 1968, pp.32, 47f, and 51.
Cf Baumstark: Geschichte, p. 13; Drijvers: Bardaisän (above, n. 18), pp.76- 95, 157-160; A. Dihle: Astrology in the Doctrine of Bardesanes. In: Studia Patris¬
tica XX (above, n.77), pp. 160-168.
"* Cf Baumstark: Geschichte, p. 169; text in E. Sachau (ed.): Inedita Syriaca.
Halle, 1870/Darmstadt, 1968, pp. 101-124.
Ibid., pp. 125-126.
