medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
On 10/24/11, Terri Morgan wrote:
> medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
>
> Earlier, John asked:
> > > (Feasts of October 20) Andrew of Crete (d. c740) was a native of
> Damascus
> > > who became a monk in Jerusalem at age 15...
>
> > What valid rationale exists for asserting that 20. October is a feast day
> of this
> > Andrew of Crete as opposed to his homonym also known as Andrew the
> Calybite?
> > He's never appeared under this date in either the RM or the Synaxary of
> Constantinople.
>
> I don't know, save that either Piero Bargellini's "Mille Santi del giorno"
> or Piero Lazzarin's "Il Nuovo libro dei santi" give this as a date of
> observance, according to Phyllis Jestice's entry of 19Oct2002. I don't have
> access to either book but assume that one of the authors had cause for his
> inclusion of the saint on that day. That is one of the fascinating things
> about postings such as these, that we have a chance to compare "observance
> guides" (for lack of a better phrase) and marvel at their differences.
>
>
> Terri Morgan
With respect, none of Phyllis' posts of 19. October 2002 mentions either Bargellini or Lazzarin. While it is true that on 21. June 2002 Phyllis announced <http://tinyurl.com/3hamwfc> that "This year, my main sources are going to be Piero Bargellini's "Mille Santi del giorno" and Piero Lazzarin's "Il Nuovo libro dei santi." ", it does not follow that in constructing her notices for that year she will have relied solely upon those particular compendia (note "_main_ sources"; emphasis mine). Indeed, Phyllis' very first entry in the "Saints of the day" for 22. June presented in the aforementioned post of 21. June 2002 contains a reference to [David] Farmer, whose _Oxford Dictionary of Saints_ probably underlies the entry in question.
Thus neither Phyllis' post cited by Terri nor Phyllis' own statement of procedures earlier that year authorizes the assertion that according to Phyllis' post either Bargellini or Lazzarin gives 20. October as a date of observance for the hymnographer and confessor Andrew of Crete [a.k.a. Andrew of Gortyn]. Nor, even had one or both done so, would this be relevant to the matter at hand. For in 2002 the only Andrew of Crete whom Phyllis entered in her "Saints of the day" for 20. October was the martyr also known as Andrew the Calybite and as Andrew _in Crisi_. In that year the hymnographer Andrew of Crete was entered in "Saints of the day" only under 4. July, as he was also in 2003. It was not until 2004 that Phyllis entered the hymnographer under 20. October and in 2004 her chief source was no longer either Bargellini or Lazzarin but instead Basil Watkins, ed., _The Book of Saints: A
Comprehensive Biographical Dictionary_, 7th ed. (New York: Continuum, 2002); see <http://tinyurl.com/6yprz3w>). As all this is readily discoverable in the archives of this list, one has to wonder what purpose other than misdirection is served by citing Bargellini and Lazzarin rather than Watkins.
Watkins' _The Book of Saints_ (2002) is a revision of the Ramsgate Abbey _The Book of Saints_. Watkins' predecessor but one, the re-set 5th ed. of 1966, gives (p. 56) only the very traditional 4. July as a feast day for the hymnographer Andrew of Crete (for what this is worth, it calls the Andrew of 20. October "Andrew the Calabyte"). Since that edition's notice of this Andrew is a lot like Phyllis' notices of him in 2004 (in that year she entered him twice, once under 4. July and once under 20. October), it's reasonable to suppose that in those instances Watkins was indeed her chief source. But since Watkins' predecessor has this Andrew under the correct date and since Phyllis, presumably following Watkins, entered him in "Saints of the day" for 2004 under 4. July before entering him again under 20. October, it would be a stretch to conclude that Watkins (whose 7th ed. I don't have to hand) was responsible for her highly unusual entering of the hymnographer Andrew of Crete under 20. October. It's at least as likely that Phyllis, whose succinct, well-written, and often entertaining daily notices were produced in a very limited amount of time, fell prey here to a confusion of the two Andrews of Crete (she hadn't written a notice of the martyr since 2002).
The often rushed generation of this list's "Saints of the day" notices on a daily basis necessarily leads to uncaught errors appearing in the posts as sent. To assume a) that in one of these postings such a highly suspicious datum as a seemingly unattested day for a given saint's observance necessarily comes from an external source and b) that that source will in all instances be reasoned and correct is contrary to experience.
Best,
John Dillon
**********************************************************************
To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR NAME
to: [log in to unmask]
To send a message to the list, address it to:
[log in to unmask]
To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion
to: [log in to unmask]
In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write to:
[log in to unmask]
For further information, visit our web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html
|
