The Date of the Great Stemma
Notes
The Great Stemma carries neither a date nor an author's name, but we are fortunate to possess a sibling Latin work, the Liber Genealogus, which provides both a date and a context for the diagram.[*]Code AN gen in the Répertoire des auteurs ecclésiastiques latins de l'antiquité et du haut moyen âge (formerly Verzeichnis der Sigel für Kirchenschriftsteller) (Freiburg: Herder, 2007), formerly Fischer's Verzeichnis der Sigel: Kirchenschriftsteller). Its number in the Clavis Patrum Latinorum is 2254.The text in its earliest form appears in the editions section of this website.
Until recently, the anonymous Liber was regarded as a free-standing and rather barren work of fifth-century Christian scholarship. In 2012 it was demonstrated for the first time that the Liber Genealogus was written as a description of the Great Stemma diagram, enriched with etymological explanations of the biblical names' Hebrew meanings, patches of theological speculation and an appendix of events after the time of Christ.[*]Jean-Baptiste Piggin. The Great Stemma: A Late Antique Diagrammatic Chronicle of Pre-Christian Time. Studia Patristica 62 (July 2013): 259–78. ibid. Mind's Eye: How One Ancient Latin Invented Our Way to Visualize Stories. Auckland: Cernimus, 2018.
This proof focuses on the order of the names in the first version of the Liber Genealogus, the G version dated 427 CE, to deduce from it information about the working practices of the text's author.
The Hebrew term generations
,
describes the many genealogies presented in the Pentateuch.
Every toledot in Genesis and Exodus presents its
names generation by generation, as the term toledot indicates, but another
traverse would have been conceivable.
Traversing is a term from mathematics and computer programming to describe
a rule-based sequence for reading the nodes of a tree diagram: the reader
begins at the root and could recite all the individuals at the first degree
of separation from the root (in the case of a genealogy, this means naming
the forefather first, then completely running through all the names of the
second generation). This would be called a breadth-first traverse. It goes
on to read the complete range of cousin nodes
which comprise the
third generation, and so on. The breadth-first traverse sequence can also be
described as level order.
Most of the text in the Liber Genealogus makes a breadth-first traverse through the data, just as Book of Genesis does.
However in a few cases, particularly when dealing with less important data
that is given some etymological analysis, the order of handling changes in
the
These concepts are handily explained with diagrams in the Wikipedia articles tree traversal, breadth-first and depth-first.
We find the distinctive approach of depth-first traverse in the Liber treatment of the offspring of Keturah, a slave-spouse of Abraham. The scriptural text, Genesis 25:1-4, is predominantly a breadth-first traverse.
Here is the Vetus Latina version, as established by Fischer (d'Aboville numbers are attached to the genealogies on this page in order to make it easier to understand how the traverse alters in the various versions. The items to which the reader should pay special attention are in bold face):[*]See Fischer, Genesis.
Adiciens Abraham accepit uxorem cui nomen Cettura et peperit ei (1) Iembram et (2) Iectan et (3) Madan et (4) Madian et (5) Iesboc et (6) Soe; et Iectan genuit (2.1) Sabau et (2.2) Theman et (2.3) Dedan, et filii Dedan fuerunt (2.3.1) Raguel et (2.3.2) Namdel et (2.3.3) Assyrin et (2.3.4) Latisin et (2.3.5) Lomomin; et filii Madian: (4.1) Gefar et (4.2) Afer et (4.3) Enoch et (4.4) Abira et (4.5) Ezrasa. Omnes hii filii Ceturae.
In the Liber Genealogus G, we find a notable change: the traverse has been altered to depth-first. Note how the personages marked above in bold text, numbered 3, 4 ,5 and 6, are delayed. Each is only listed after his older brother's descendants have been exhaustively listed:[*]The full text of the Liber Genealogus G is included in this edition in the aftermatter. This text is preserved in two manuscripts: St. Gall, Stiftsbibliothek 133, (CLA VII.911), written during the late 8th or early 9th century, probably at St. Gall, and Rome, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale Vittorio Emanuele II, Vitt. Em. 1325 (formerly Cheltenham or Phillipps 12266), written at Nonantola in the 10th or early 11th century.
Nam et de Cettura concubina habuit Abraham filios sex: (1a) primitivus Iebda, (1b) secundus Baux; (2) III Iectan; et filii eius tres: (2.1) primitivus Sabau, (2.2) secundus Theman, (2.3) III Dedan; et filii eius Dedan quinque et ista nomina eorum: (2.3.1) primogenitus Raguel, (2.3.2) secundus Namdel, (2.3.3) III Assyrin, (2.3.4) IIII Latisunt, (2.3.5) V Lomomen;(3) tertius vero filius Abrahae Madam, (4) quartus Maxian; et filii eius quinque: (4.1) primitivus Gefar, (4.2) secundus Afer, (4.3) III Enoch, (4.4) IIII Abira, (4.5) V Aezrasa. (5) VI vero filius Abrahae Iesboe, (6) VII Soreri; hii omnes filii Abrahae sex de Cettura et nepotes XIII.
The manipulation in order is significant, since it implies, at the very
least, that the Liber author was working from abstracts or
notes.[*] The numbering 1a and 1b arises
because this version of the Liber misreads Iembram
(corrected to Zimram in the Great Stemma) and splits the name in two,
transmitting it as Iebda and Baux. As a result, the G text promises to
name six sons of Keturah, but actually names seven. In addition, three of
the names given, Theman, Raguel and Namdel, will be unfamiliar to western
bible readers, as they were suppressed by Jerome.
Only if such an abstract were a graphical stemma would a depth-first traverse offer a natural reading order. We are driven to the conclusion that the G author has not copied the names directly from Genesis, but from a diagram, reading each descent through to its end before beginning on the next child of Keturah, as shown in the next figure.
The other recensions of the Liber Genealogus make it even
plainer how attentive the authors are to order. Only eleven years after G,
the Liber Genealogus F recension is prepared, perhaps as a
fresh learning exercise (online in Plutei 20.54). Its editor
appears to have both the Genesis and the rectifies
it in a remarkable manner: he leaves his predecessor's
depth-first sequence in place, but cautiously re-inserts persons 3, 4, 5 and
6 in their breadth-first positions as well, so that they are now duplicated:[*]This text can be read online: see Plutei
20.54 in Florence from 24r, commencing "Incipiunt genealogiae ...".
Keturah begins near the end of 26r, 19 folios before the Great Stemma.
Either the F editor, or a later copyist, has also used Jerome's Vulgate to
rectify the names themselves: the Iebda-Baux split has been corrected,
Ezrasa has been hebraicized to Eldaa, and the number of grandchildren has
been corrected from 13 to 12 through the deletion of Theman. Oddly, Raguel
and Namdel have been allowed to stand.
Nam et de Cetthura concubina nati sunt Abraae filii VI: (1) primus nomine Zamram, (2) secundus Iexsam, (3) tertius Madian, (4) quartus Madian, (5) sextus [sic] Iesbochi, (6) sextus Sue; hii filii Abrae de Cetthura; porro Iexsam genuit: (2.1) Saban et (2.3) Dadan; Dadam autem genuit filios V (2.3.1) primus Raguel, (2.3.2) secundus Namdehel, (2.3.3) tertius Assurim, (2.3.4) quartus Latusim, (2.3.5) quintus Lommin; (3) tertius vero filius Habrae de Cetthura Madan dictus est, (4) quartus Madian et hii filii eius V: (4.1) primus Epha, (4.2) secundus Afer, (4.3) tertius Enoc, (4.4) quartus Abida, (4.5) quintus Eldaa; omnes hii filii Madian; (5) quinque filius Abraam Iesboch, (6) sextus Sue; hii omnes filii Abraam de Cetthura et nepotes duodecim (Link to 26r).
The
The diagrammatic order of Keturah shown above is the order used in the
present edition. It is one of five full or partial instances where the
scriptural order of the names is altered in the
The close bond with the Liber Genealogus is corroborated by many other observations.
In particular, they both culminate in a key commentary which interprets the genealogies in the light of verse 5:5 of the New Testament Book of Revelation and asserts that Luke the evangelist's genealogy, from the forefather Nathan, in fact terminates at Mary, not Joseph. Both comment that these parallel biological descents are explained in Revelation by a lion symbolizing Solomon and a root symbolizing the obscure royal son Nathan.[*]Gen 49:9 associates the tribe of Judah with a lion cub; Isaiah 11:1, 10, echoed in Rom 15:12, establishes the phrase "root of Jesse". This exegesis says:[*]Sicut Lucas evangelista per Natan ad Mariam originem ducit, ita et Matheus euvangelista per Salomonem ad Ioseph originem demonstrabit id est ex tribu Iuda, ut apparet eos de una tribu exire et sic ad Christum secundum carnem pervenire. Ut compleatur quod scriptum est, "Ecce vicit leo de tribu Iuda radix David," leo ex Salomone et radix ex Natan.
Whereas the evangelist Luke traces the origin of Mary back to Nathan, the evangelist Mathew traces that of Joseph back to Solomon, demonstrating an ancestry from the tribe of Judah. Thus it is clear that these two are biologically descended from a single tribe, leading down to Christ, so that what was written might be fulfilled, "Behold, the lion of the tribe of Judah, the root of David, has prevailed," whereby the lion is Solomon, the root is Nathan.
We know the Liber Genealogus G follows the order of the diagram at the micro level. What can we say of the macro level? Here, once again, we find that the text order mimics the natural reading order of the diagram, not a chronological or biblical order. The numbers in the following diagram represent the textual order of the material in the Liber Genealogus, here overlaid on a schematic view of the Great Stemma:
One notes how the Liber begins with the upper line or Filum A (1), interrupts this with Filum B, the children of Cain (2), then continues (3) via the Matthew genealogy to Christ (4). Subsequently it examines the material (5 and 6) with chronographic information and before reverting to the Lucan genealogy (7) with which it closes.
There is one very remarkable feature of the Liber Genealogus anni 427 to which we must draw attention. Its author evidently belonged to the Donatist church, the majority but schismatic Christian church in North Africa against which Augustine of Hippo so fiercely railed, since the text criticizes Catholic persecution of Donatists. This increases the likelihood that the Great Stemma itself is a product of the Donatists, but there is as yet no certain indication for this. Future scholars would be well advised to investigate where this pointer leads.[*]Evidence for a common transmission and perhaps a common origin is presented in: Rouse, Richard, and Charles McNelis. North African Literary Activity: A Cyprian Fragment, the Stichometric Lists and a Donatist Compendium. Revue d’histoire des textes 30 (2000): 189–238.
The following annexe describes four more depth-first instances in the Liber Genealogus G. Sections that are depth-first are highlighted in bold.
The first instance is the array of Esau's five wives. The first two wives are introduced at Genesis 26: 34-35. The remaining three are listed at Genesis 36:1-5, which first lists all the wives, then follows up with the children at 15-19. But both G and F break with that order:
