544
SIEACH (BOOK OF)
SlRACn (HOOK OF)
in spite of the definite statement of Edci'srieiii: and others* (see Nestle, ilnriiinnlu-n, Vi'yi, p. i%; J. K. Zenner, ' Ecdesiasticus nach Cod. Vat. 3;B ' mZ.f. Kath. T/ieol. 1895; Kyssel, p. xxviii ; and now the edition of Haitj.t
Parsons nsed for this Ijook fourteen MSS ; the two nncials iii. and '23, i.e. AV, but eod. 70 (Hoeschel's Angustanus) only for the Prologue and th. 1. In the .Addenda is to be found for the Prologue the collation of a fifteenth MS {2;)4). Fritzsche ex- cerpted the ap])aratus of Par.soiis, but in an in- suliicient waj*, and added the collation of C, S, and Hoeschel's Augustanus from his edition of l()04.t
In Swete's 01' in Greek we have a faithful repre- .sentation of the readings of BACS ( = N); but it is now generally acknowledged that the text of these uncials is a ver3- bad one in Sirach.§ It is therefore a great boon that the Syndics of the Cambridge University Press are to publish shortly an edition of the lodex Vaticanus 346 ( = HP 248, the basis of c) by J. H. A. Hart, who, with the assent of the Syndics, had the kindness to communicate to the present writer, for the benefit of this article, the proofs before publication.il
Of MSS not .vet laid under contribution there are known to the present writer : — (1) A palimpsest of the 6th or 7th cent. at St. Petersburg, written in three ookimns (see Urtrxt, p. 74 ; Swete, Introd. p. 147 n. 12). (2) Two paHmpsest leaves belonging to cod. 2 in the Patriarchal Library at Jerusalem, ascribed to the Gth cent , containing Prol and li-i* 129-311, published by J. R. Harris, Biblical Fragments from Mount Sitiai. No. 5.
(.•!) The <,fcirivzr, (ch. 51) is to be found in Cod. Bodl. ilise. 205 (xiv saec.) ■ see Coxe. Catalovis, i. 762. This chapter is missing in the MSS 296 and ;i08* of' HP and (at present) in the codex S>ro-Hexaplaris Anibrosianus ; but there only through the de- plorable loss Df a leaf.
Of minuscles, two Vienna MSS, Cod. Tlieol. Gr. xi. and cxlvii., both of which were brought by Busbecq from Const.antinople, h.ave been partiail.v collated i)y Edw. Hatch and quoted as Vienna 1 and 2 in his Essay on the text of Eoclesiasticus (t'.wai'fi in Bi'dical Greek, p. 247 ff.). On the confusion al)outthe 308 (or 308*) in HPsee Hatch, I.e. 24S ; and Swete, Introd. p. lo9. No. 141).
Now comes the strange fact that our Greek MSS — which, as stated, go back, without any ex- ception, to one and the same copy, in which the dis- location had tn ken place — show the greatest diverg- ences. For instance, after I'' two lines are inserted by six MSS of HP (23, 5.5, 70. In6, 248, 253) ; after v.^ again two lines 'by five MSS (the above without 248) ; after v.'" and v." two lines, but only bj' two MSS (70, 253) ; after v." one line by two MSS (here, however, not 70 and 253, but 70 and 248) ; after v.^ two lines by four MSS (70, 106, 248, 253) ; in v.'" two words, djr' aiV^s, by one MS (70). How is this possible if all go back to the same original? And the variation is increased by the second and thiid class of our witnesses, the ancient Versions and Patristic Quotations.
vii. Veksions and Quotations.— (a) In the
• e.fj. C. H. Toy (art. * Ecdesiasticus ' in Encyc. Bibl. voL U. col. 1173).
t At present the Latin order is found in the edition of Camerarius ; can this be meant?
; Bret.schneider, p. 694 : ' Cum Compl. textu maxima ex parte coTisentit codex Augustanus, cuius lectiones Hoeschelius in crilidn sacris t. v. nobis dedit, quod modo accuratius ac clarius fei'isset voluerim. , . . quum . . . baud raro lectiones, neque eas epernendas baboret, quorum nullum in rdiquis deprebenditur vc.-tigium.' That Hoeschel's codex E is identical with * Drusii JIS Huidelbergense' Bretschneider failed to recognize.
§ Edw. Hatch closes his examination of the text of Sirach with the remark, that as one of the points established by his investigation will be acknowledged 'tne inferior value of some of the more famous uncial Mt;S as compared with some cursives ' (E8isa;/s, p. '2^1).
i! One of the characteristics of this MS Is the insertion of about 130 plosses, to guard the text against misunderstanding, especially m chs. 1-30 ; see 1^^ it aAr6i/«, 2* artjutm;, 321 ^^xt^ifY,. rv: and oL^pcrunr., 22 iff-;^ and ^XJffHv o^tlxXucit^ ** « /Mtrxict, 4^ iAi™,-, 25 xctri: u.Y.i'i <'., 5" ifH<, 637 TiA«/»f, 88 liputfS:,^ 1310 ecxfitrait, 16* iv Tatrii. 11 J,i Tft^t^ey.', 20 i|,&i;, 17» tl/vfrSc, 29 cff.vi.
Interesting is 19'^ woWaxit yitp yiitrttt 3i«)9«Ar u^Txiiz, because the motive is quite the same as led to the addition of i*'**: in Mt 6'^. Some of them are fovmd in ttie S.vro-Hexaplaric 'MS nnder asterisks, one of these (511) alao in one of the Hebrew texts, others in the Latin texts.
nr^': plnce ba.i to be mentioned the Syri.io versioa \.v I'au! of i'ella i.e.. 616 .4.L).), the so-called Syru- !-iei»pi«r, preserved to us through the codex .^>T(>- tl?::a|'lariE Anibrosianus. If we retain the designatitrr, Sy^oUexaplar, we must bear in mind that Sirach had no place in Origen's Hexapla ; but in one jiarticular respect this .Syriac version reminds us of the Hexapla : one of the critical marks of Origen, the asteriscus, ajipears also in Sirach, at least in its first part up to ch. 13. There are altogether 45 asterisks, and they mark just some of the additions mentioned above. No Greek MS of Sirach seems to have been found as yet with asterisks ; but there is scaicely a doubt that the asterisks were not added by Paul of Telia, but were taken over by him from the Greek M.S which he translated. This MS contained, before the text of tlie book, the capitulation, which is found in the so-called /Syno^wis of Chrysostom (Jligne, Patr. Gr. Ivi. 575), and some good corrections of the printed text may be gathered from it. Now the question arises the more : Where did these additions com* from in this Greek copj' ? Take the very first one, which has an asterisk in p, I' d?r' aiV^s, given in the text in Syriac as .-ijoij:, and on the margin, to remove any ambiguity, in Greek letters as AIIATTHS. Tliere is a slight difference bet-ween p and the solitary Greek witness, from which this addition is known hitherto, Hoeschel's Augustanus (70), inasmuch as the latter gives it after /xerd irdiTTjs aapKit ('alii non agnoscunt has voculas neque Athanasius Orat. 3. contra Arian.'), while p has it after Kara, ttji' Sdcriv airroO. This makes no dift'erence of sense ; in both cases djr' avrrji is a limitation of the preceding avrriv (retained by 70 p) : God does not shed out His whole wisdom (oi>r^i') on all flesh, but only dir' aiJr^s; it is a mere dogmatical correction ; but while appearing hitherto only in a single and late Greek MS— 70 is of the loth cent. — it gains suddenly in strength when sho^i'n by p to be perhaps 1000 years older ; nevertheless it is a mere gloss, which might be added by any copyist from his own brain, without any source. But what about the lines immedi- ately following, put in p under asterisks in quite the same way ?—