(a) Greek writers.—The first notice of the Dia- tessaron occurs in Eusebius (HE iy. 36), who states
* Zahn, Forschungen, i. p. 282.
t Cf. Xpovnsy, Exxdnorworixh, Terpoevoyyérsoy, etc. Baethgen objects that these were used also as titles in Greek, and, as such, were taken over into Syriac, while Diatessaron is a Greek musi- cal terminus technicus, and does not occur elsewhere in Syriac a or p. 89; cf. Zahn, Forsch. i. pp. 104f.,
DIATESSARON
that Tatian, whom he wrongly describes as the former leader of the Encratites, ‘composed a sort of connexion and compilation, I know not how, of the Gospels, and called it the Diatessaron. This work is current in some quarters (with some per- sons) even to the present day.’* The work is also briefly mentioned by Epiphanius (Her. 46. 1), who says: ‘The Diatessaron Gospel is said to have been composed by him (Tatian). It is called by some the Gospel according to the Hebrews.’+ Apart from these two writers no mention ¢ is made of the Diatessaron by either Greek or Latin writers until the 6th cent. (see below, § iii. 6) ; and the silence of such writers as Irenzus, Clement of Alexandria, Jerome, or Augustine is explicable only on the supposition that the work was exclusively a Syriac one, and, as such, unknown to the Greek Church.
Before passing on to the evidence afforded by Syriac writers, we may note two bie arising out ot the above notices which tend to confirm the impression made by the silence of the Greek Fathers. The first is the omission of the clause ‘I know not how’ (ov« o76 érws) in the Syriac translation (4th cent.) of Eusebius’ History.§ The explanation of this fact given by Hjelt|| is no doubt correct, viz. that the translator purposely suppressed the clause as irrelevant, since Tatian’s work was well known both to himself and to his Syriac readers. Equally interesting is the trans- lator’s insertion of the words ‘now this is the (Evangelion) da-Méhalléte’ (Gospel of the Mixed) after the word ‘ Diatessaron,’ which shows that the Syriac title of the Harmony was already cur- rent in the 4th century. The second point is con- nected with the confusion that existed, according to Epiphanius, in the minds of some with regard to the Diatessaron and the Gospel according to the Hebrews. As Zahn (forsch. i. 25) has pointed out, the confusion admits of a tolerably easy solution on the supposition that the Diatessaron was a Syriac work. When the existence of another Gospel, written in the same or a nearly allied dialect, among the half-heretical Nazareans, 7.e. in almost the same district, became known, it was not unnatural to suppose that the two were either closely allied or even identical. Such a mistake, however, could have arisen only amongst people who were either ignorant of .Aramaic, or who possessed no knowledge of the works in question save at second hand.
(6) Syriac writers.—In contrast to the compara- tive ignorance displayed on this subject by Greek authorities, the statements made by Syriac writers concerning the Diatessaron, and the evidence of its use in the Syrian Church, are both clear and decisive. The earliest testimony is contained in the Doctrine of Addai, a work which, in its present form, is variously dated by critics from the middle of the 3rd cent. (Zahn) to the begin- ning of the 5th cent. (von Dobschiitz, Christus- bilder, p. 158 f.). But, though the form in which we now possess this text may not be earlier than A.D. 400, its contents are clearly based on very early tradition, and we may therefore safely follow Zahn (Forsch. i. 90f.) in regarding it as a trust- worthy witness to the practice of the Edessene Church during the 3rd century. The crucial passage states that ‘much people gathered together day by day, and came to the prayer of the (Divine) service and to (the reading of) the Old Testament and the
* 6 ueévros ye xpérepos wirdy &pxnyos 6 Tariavos covegescy tive zoel orvecyuyiy ob 01d” Oras ray evayytrion ouviels 70 diererocpmy TOUTO TpoTwyo TE, OKs THPH TITY ELOETS YOY E PET Ob.
ft Aévercs 58 7d Dik terokpwy ayyéAsoy Ux’ avuToD yeyevnobos Orep zure ‘“KGpafous rivis xeAovas. :
{ On the obscure scholion to Mt 2748 contained in Cod. 72, see Zahn, Forschungen, i. 26f.
§ ed. Wright and M‘Lean, Cambridge, 1898, p. 243.
|| Die altsyrische Evangelientibersetzung und Tatians Diates- swron, p. 24 note.
DIATESSARON
New, (namely) the Diatessaron, and believed in the
resurrection of the dead.’* Of a similar nature is the command given to his presbyters in Addai’s parting speech : + ‘The Law and the Prophets and the Gospel, wherein ye read every day before the people; and the Epistles of Paul which Simon <ephas sent us from the city of Rome; and the Acts of the Twelve Apostles, which John the son of Zebedee sent us from Ephesus: these writings (or Scriptures) shall ye read in the churches of Christ, and besides them nothing else shall ye read.’ These two passages clearly show that the terms ‘Diatessaron’ and ‘Gospel’ were interchange- able, and_ also that the version of the Syriac Gospels adopted by the Edessene Church for use in Divine service was that which had been com- posed by Tatian. Internal evidence, again, shows that Aphraates, the bishop of the convent of St. Matthew near Mosul, made use of the same version, though the Gospel quotations in his Homilies (written between 336 and 345 A.D.) are not taken exclusively from Tatian’s work. The most striking proof, however, of the widespread use of the Diatessaron in the Syrian Church during the 4th cent., and of the high repute in which it stood, is the fact that it forms the basis of the commentary on the Gospels written by the famous Ephraem Syrus (d. 373 A.D.; see below, § iii. a). It is noteworthy also that the Gospel quotations which are to be found in his genuine works appear to be also taken from the Harmony.t