The Place of the Peshitto Version in the Apparatus Criticus of the Greek New Testament 9781463211783

This essay by Gwilliam explores the vital role of the Syriac Peshitta for textual criticism of the New Testament. While

219 63 4MB

English Pages 60 [56] Year 2006

Report DMCA / Copyright

DOWNLOAD PDF FILE

Recommend Papers

The Place of the Peshitto Version in the Apparatus Criticus of the Greek New Testament
 9781463211783

  • 0 0 0
  • Like this paper and download? You can publish your own PDF file online for free in a few minutes! Sign Up
File loading please wait...
Citation preview

At.

/

""

«•"

¿ > -

y

'

s

V r" p

.. ií 0 ,i K v

r ¡f.»

111**'

ì

'

>r •o

o

r--

,í; 'lis540 >7 . i « v%. /

-.'i,

j * . ..A C ^ 'i a -i, Ö -3? «T h.

f ¡

X,

--»

'

•e-.. M , W. M \\

-

O/ • %

Í*

'

O' -

-y'S

?ï- ?'

O"

t

ANALECTA GORGIANA

Volume 4

General Editor

George Anton Kiraz Analecta Gorgiana is a collection of long essays and short monographs which are consistently cited by modern scholars but previously difficult to find because of their original appearance in obscure publications. Now conveniently published, these essays are not only vital for our understanding of the history of research and ideas, but are also indispensable tools for the continuation and development of on-going research. Carefully selected by a team of scholars based on their relevance to modern scholarship, these essays can now be fully utilized by scholars and proudly owned by libraries.

T h e Place of the Peshitto Version in the Apparatus Criticus of the Greek N e w Testament

The Place of the Peshitto Version in the Apparatus Criticus of the Greek New Testament

G . H . GWILLIAM

GORGIAS PRESS

2006

First Gorgias Press Edition, 2006

The special contents of this edition are copyright , Kali KaraTr.: so Pesh. taX but perhaps the idiom would hardly allow another rendering. B ftXrjdev om. KIXL.

22. EIkt) : so Pesh. and the majority; B omits. 25. 'Ev rrj oSui jj.tr avrov. Pesh., in the order of B, /ACT' avrov, ey ttj 0S0. Pesh. has the second , the order of the majority, including B ; so Pesh.; many cursives eyw tv Tlvevfian Qeou. 31. Toís áv6páiroi».y-v

iv. 10. 35. ®r¡cravpov : so the majority with B and Pesh.; others add rtp KapSias. 38. 'AweKpidrjo-av : B adds auTu: Pesh. . . . clU»., a7r{Kpi0T]oí air oí. B

omits Se, omits avrov, Pesh. read both. 47. Pesh. has this verse, which B omits. X I I I . 1. Aé, airó: B omits; Pesh. read Se, and cra-o, or ex. 9. 'Anoveiv: so Pesh., B omits. 11. Et7T£v airoZs : so Pesh. with B and the majority. N omits avrots.

14. A¿toís in the majority; Pesh. had eir awTots, as D and others, or ev, the reading of a few MSS. 15. Tois thai in the great majority, but Pesh. read rois coo-iv avrwv bis, which has little support. 16. Ta tora vfííúv : so Pesh.; B omits v/uov. 17. Pesh. read yáp, which N and a few omit. 2 2. Tov aiúivos TovTov : so Pesh.; B omits TOVTOV. 23. Tryv yrjv TIJV KaX-qv : this is the order of Pesh., but it is the natural order of the Syriac. B and others T:]V KaX-qv yr¡v. 24. Siretpovrt: Pefch. ^»JJ is the v-n-eipavTi of B. 28. Oí Se SovXoi: so Pesli.; B omits. 31. Pesh. as the majority with B ; tXaXrjcrtv for TtapiO-qKev in D and others. 33. Airo« : N and others add Aeywv: Pesh. as the majority. 34. OVK : J1 without y « * almost proves that Pesh. read OVK, and not ouStv of B and others. 35. IIpor/Tov: so Pesh., X adds Ho-aiov. Kúu-fjLov : B omits, Pesh. reads it. 36. 'O 'lr¡ v - 4. 5.9.

I

3.

27, 28, 3 1 , 39, 4 8 ; vi. 5b, 1 5 , 16, 18, 20, 22 b, 24, 3 2 ; vii. 2, 5, 1 2 , 1 3 , 1 6 , 19, 29 ; viii. 5, 8, 1 3 b, 1 5 ; ix. 2, 5, 6 , 1 1 bis, 18, 22, 26, 33, 34, 3 6 ; x. 8, 1 2 , 1 4 b , 19, 2 3 ; xi. 5, 10 b, 1 6 , 2 1 b ; xii. 3, 8, xo, 1 1 , 2 2 b , 28, 32, 3 5 , 4 0 ; xiii. i i , 14, 15.

3T> 33. 35. 5 2 ;

xiv

- I5t>, 19> 23.

[19]

208

Stadia Biblica et Ecclesiastica

The remaining one hundred and sixty-seven passages form two groups; (I) those in which the Peshitto supports the readings of the majority of Greek MSS., (II) those in which the Peshitto supports the readings of codex B. I- i- 5. 7.

I0 > l 8 a

, 25; ii. 21 ; iii. 14, 1 6 ; iv. 9, 13, 23,

24; v. i i , 22, 25b, 30, 32b, 44 ter, 47 b ; vi. 1, 4bis, 5 a bis, 6, 13, 21, 22 a, 25, 33 ; vii. 9, 10, 1 4 ; viii. 2, 3, 9, 10, 13, 21, 25 bis, 27, 29, 31 ; ix. 2, 12, 14, 23 ; x. 3,

TO,

14, 33 ; xi.

8 bis, 9, 10 a, 15, 16, 17, 21, 23 bis, 26 ; xii. 4, 15, 25, 27, 31, 38, 44, 46, 47 ; xiii. 1, 9, 16, 22, 23, 28, 34,35, 36 bis, 37, 40, 43- 44 a, 45, 51 bis, 55, 57 ; xiv. 3 bis, 4,10, 14, 15 a, 18, 25, 2 6 , 27. 29, 3°J 33. 34, 3 6 I I . i. 6, 15, 1 8 b ; ii. 17, 18, 1 9 ; iii. 3, 6, 7 , 1 2 , 16 bis; iv. 3, 5, 10, 13b, 16, 23 ; v. 25 a, 32a, 47 bis; vi. 12 ; vii. 8, 9, 15, 24, 29 ; viii. 5, 7 , 1 3 , 38, 3 2 ; ix. 4 bis, 5, 8, 13, 17, 18, 32, 35 ; x. 2, 4, 1 0 ; xi. 2, 5, 16, 19, 23 bis; xii. 4, 14, 22 a, 38; xiii. 24, 44 b, 4 6 ; xiv. 6, 12, 13, 22, 24, 25, 28. Several of the verses, which are cited, involve more than one distinct point in the evidence ; they are therefore necessarily entered in the summary under more than one head. Some of the verses, which are excluded, may be thought to contain evidence of the connexion of the Peshitto with the majority of the M S S . on the one side, or with cod. B on the other. We have preferred in all cases of doubt to exclude the verse, rather than to seem to overstate the case ; but a few instances more or less would make no real difference in the general result, which is as follows :—• In fourteen chapters the readings of the Peshitto are found to support the Traditional Greek Text in one hundred and eight places, and the Text of codex B in sixty-five places— more than half the number.

[20]

2C>9

II. I. It is not our intention in this essay to pursue our investigations beyond tbe Holy Gospels. Questions concerning the value of the evidence of the Peshitto are limited to those books for the present; when Curetonian Epistles and a Lewis Acts have been discovered, a wider field will be opened up ; but the results we have already obtained, and the considerations to follow, are, we think, sufficient in amount and weight to stamp the character of the Peshitto as a whole. These results will by some be received with surprise ; yet Westcott and Hort have already said 1 :— ' Nevertheless the two texts are not identical. In a considerable number of variations the Vulgate Syriac 2 sides with one or other of the Pre-Syrian texts against the Antiochian Fathers and the late Greek text, or else has a transitional reading, which has often, though not always, some Greek documentary attestation.' The first two assertions in this quotation ai-e, on the whole, confirmed by our examination of the text of Matt, i-xiv. The last assertion is somewhat vague, but appeal's intended to mean that the Peshitto readings form a connecting link between the texts which the writers call respectively ' Pre-Syrian' and ' Antiochian and late.' To complete our investigation, we will now collect from the same chapters of St. Matthew those places in which the Peshitto witnesses to independent readings, as distinguished from those in which, as we have already seen, it supports either codex B or the Traditional Greek Text. We will add in each case a comNew Test., Introd., § 189 By which they mean the Peshitto. As has often been pointed out, this epithet expresses the reception and popularity of this version, but assumes a theory about its origin which is still a subject of discussion. 1 2

[21]

Studia Biblica et Ecclesiastica

2IO

parison w i t h t h e C u r e t o n i a n a n d t h e L e w i s 1 M S S . , a n d g i v e , w h e r e necessary or desirable, c o n f i r m a t o r y r e a d i n g s , e s p e c i a l l y t h o s e of D , a n d t h e e v i d e n c e of t h e O l d L a t i n ; b u t w e s h a l l n o t a t t e m p t to exhibit the attestations in f u l l : space

would

n o t p e r m i t , a n d t h e reader c a n v e r i f y o u r conclusions

from

t h e p a g e s of Teschendorf. 2.

ST. MATTHEW, i - s i v .

I . 20. Om. tSou, also ii. i , and often.

A s the use of Joi, lo, is in

accordance with Syiiac idiom, i t is difficult to believe that a translator would fail to employ the particle, if iSov were before him i n his Greek M S .

Sometimes, b u t not o f t e n — e . g . xii. 4 9 — l o t , lo, is

introduced, where there is no iSov in the Greek.

Cur. and L p .

omit at i. 20, but at ii. 1 read and lo. 23. M t f f fjfjiitiv u ©tos, may be intended to express ó.

^

. Our God is with us, b u t our

Cur. and L p . as Pesh., b u t trans, v . /.

25. 'Eyivmo-Kcv: Pesli. the Old Latin.

v

cyvw avrr¡v, the reading of D and

Cur. and L p . different.

I I . 1. Om. ISov, sse i. 20. TTJS 'IovSaias, Jjoow?

Bethlehem

of Judah

(so C u r .

and Lp.) as ver. 6, and so ver. 5. 5. Om. avr£> : so N b Chrys. (codd. Moscuenses 3), but not C u r . and L p . 6. Om. yrj, Pesh. Cur. L p . 8. Ei7riV

Pesh. adds yOoti*., carrots, w i t h Cur. and L p .

Pesh.

has the order it. t. iraiSiov axpi/Sws: so C u r . ; L p . omits a/cpi/Jtus. 'Eirav



evprp-e, a7rayyetA.are yuot, oL w o n j o k

And when ye have found

him, come tell me.

1¿0O

I t is doubtful

if the translator had avrov. but probable t b a t lie lead xxviii. 6, where Sevre tSert is rendered

^ll.

SCUTE.

Cp.

C u r . and L p .

as Pesh. 1 1 . Pesh. txfivpvav Kai Xifiavov.

So C u r . and L p .

13. O m . ISov, see i. 2 0 ; so Cur. and L p . 14. "O St ¿yepOeíi Xova-tv: Pesh. and Cur. add (rryjvai, t h e Old L a t i n r e a d i n g , and omit curares. L p . omits t h e Terse. 17. Pesh. transposes, No/rail TO irpocraMrov crov, xal aXuifrai rr/v KetjiaXrjv trov. So Cur. Lp. is defective to viii. 3. 18. >f S;°i t cot, avrbs a—o§u>