(III.) 7V(e Syriac Version of John viii, 1-11. — From the MS. sent by Abp. Usher to De Dieu, the latter pub- lished this section in 1631. From De Dieu it was in- serted in the London Polyglot, with a reference to Ush- er's MS., and hence it has passed with the other edi- tions of the Peshito, where it is a mere interpolation.
A copy of the same version (essentially) is found in Ridley's Codex Barsalibivi, Avhere it is attributed to Maras, 622; Adler found it also in a Paris MS. ascribed to Abbas Mar Paul.
Bar-Salibi cites a different version, out of IMaras, bishop of Amida, through the chronicle of Zacharias of Mclitina. See Asseniani {BiUioth. Orient, ii, .53 and 170), who gives the introductory words. Probably the version edited is that of Paul (as stated in the Paris MS.), and that of Maras the one cited by Bar-Salibi ; while in Ridley's MS. the two are confounded. The Paul mentioned is apparently Paul of Tela, the trans- lator of the Hexaplar Greek text into Syriac.
E. The Jerusalem Syriac Lectionary. — The MS. in the Vatican containing this version was pretty fully de- scribed by S. E. Assemani in 1756 in the catalogue of the JMSS. belonging to that library; but so few copies of that work escaped destruction by fire that it was vir- tually unpublished and its contents almost unknown. Adler, who, at Copenhagen, had the advantage of study- ing one of the few copies of this catalogue, drew public attention to this peculiar document in his Kurze Ueher- sicht seiner hiblisch-kritischen Reise nach Rom (Altoiia, 1783), p. 118-127, and, still further, in 1789, in his val- uable examination of the Syriac versions. The MS. was written in 1031 in peculiar Syriac writing; the portions are, of course, those for the different festivals, some parts of the Gospels not being there at all. The dialect is not common Syriac; it was termed the Jeru- salem Syriac from its being supposed to resemble the Jerusalem Talmud in language and other points. The grammar is peculiar; the forms almost Chaldee rather than Syriac; two characters are used for expressing PH and P.
In Adler's opinion its date as a version would be from the 4th to the 6th centurj-; but it can hardly be sup- posed that it is of so early an age, or that any Sj'rians then could have used so corrupt a dialect. It may rather be supposed to be a translation made from a Greek lectionary, never having existed as a substantive translation. To what age its execution should be as- signed seems wholly uncertain. A further account of the MS. of this version, drawn up from a comparison of Assemani's description in the Vatican catalogue, and that of Adler, with the MS. itself in the Vatican Libra- ry, is given in Home's fntrod. iv, 284-287. The only complete passage published till recently was owing to Adler — viz. Matt, xxvii, 3-32; and scholars could only repeat or work upon what he gave. But the version has been published entire by Minisehalchi Erizzo (Ve- rona, 1861, 1864, 2 vols. 4to; the first containing the text, with a Latin translation ; the second, prolegomena and a glossary). Critical editors of the Greek Tes- tament cannot now overlook this very valuable docu- ment, whose readings are so important. It contains the following portions of the Gospels : all Matthew ex- cept iii, 12; v,34-41; vi, 25-34; vii, 19-23; viii, 14-19; X, 9-15,23-31,34-36; xi, 16-26; xii, 1-29, 38-50; xiii, 1_43, 55-58; xiv, 1-13, 35, 36; xv, 1-20, 29-31 ; xvi, 1- 12, 20-28; xvii, 20, 27; xviii. 5-9, 11, 21,22; xix, 1, 2, 13-15; XX, 17-28; xxi, 44-46; xxvi, 40-43 ; all Mark except i, 12-34,45; ii, 13, 18-22; iii, 6-35; iv; v, 1-23, 35-43; vi, 6-13, 31-56; vii, 1-23; viii, 1-26, 32, 33; ix, 1-15,31,41-50; X, 1-31,46-52; xi, 1-21,26-33; xii, 1- 27; xiii; xiv; xv, 1-15,33-42; all Luke except i, 69- 75, 77-79; iii, 23-38; iv, 1-15, 37-44; v, 12-16, 33-39; vi. 11-16, 24-30, 37-49; vii, 17, 18, 30-35; viii, 22-25, 40; ix, 7-26, 4.5-56; x, 13-15, 22-24; xi, 1-26, 34-54; xii, 1, 13-15, 22-31, 41-59; xiii, 1-10, 30-35; xiv, 12- 15, 25-35; xv, 1-10; xvi, 1-9, 16-18; xvii, 1, 2, 20-37; xviii, 1, 15-17, 28-34; xix, 11-48; xx, 9-44; xxi, 5-7,
SYRIAC VERSIONS
121
SYRIAC VERSIONS
20-24, 37, 38; xxii, 40, 41, 46-71 ; xxiii, 1-31, 50-56; all John except ii, 23-25 ; iii, 34-36 ; iv, 1-4, 43-45 ; vi, 34.45,46,71; vii, 30-36; xi, 46, 55-57; xiii, 18-30; xix. 21-24.
As to the readings, it appears to us that they are such as characterized the 5th and 6tli centuries. The text is not that of X, B, Z, or even D, but rather tliat of A and C. In Matt, vi, it has the doxology of the Lord's Prayer, which is not in X, B, D, Z ; it has John vii, .53-viii, 11 ; contains Jolm v, 3, 4; has the usual or- der of the fourth and fifth verses in jMatt. v; and has the later enlarged form of ver. 44. It also contains the last twelve verses of Mark xvi, contrary to X and B; has vlog, not ^toc, in John i, 18 ; and in iMatt. xxii, 35 has the later reading koi Xsycoi', omitted in B, L, and the Peshito. It has also o'l CwStKa in Luke xxii, 14, with A, C, E, etc., but contrary to X, B, D. the Curetonian Syriac, and Italic. In John i, 27 it has the words tju- irpoa^sv jxov ykyoviv, contrar}' to N, B, L, and the Cu- retonian S3-riac; but with A, E, F, etc., the old Italic, Vulgate, and Peshito. In Matt, xix, 17 it has the old and genuine ri /.le tptuTc^g nepi tov c'ljaSrov , in John iii. 15, i-ii) aTr6\t]rai dWct are omitted with X and the Curetonian Syriac, E, etc. On the whole, while it is easy to see a number of the oldest readings in the text, such as those in X, B, the old Italic, D, etc., yet the readings of a later period prevail. Its text, though often differing from the Peshito, is neither older nor better.