Introduction to the textual criticism of the Greek New TestamentNestle, Eberhard
Religion
Introduction to the textual criticism of the Greek New Testament
Nestle, Eberhard
Bible. New Testament -- Criticism, Textual
When and where was this translation made? An ancient Syrian tradition
asserts that it was done by the Apostle Thaddaeus, who came on a mission
to Abgar Uchama—_i.e._ Abgar the Black—King of Edessa, after the death
of Jesus, which mission, they say, arose out of a correspondence that
Abgar had previously had with Jesus. Another tradition ascribes it to
Aggaeus (Aggai), the disciple of Thaddaeus, and it is even attributed to
Mark the Evangelist. It is also said that Luke was by birth a Syrian of
Antioch, a tradition which may preserve an element of truth.
The earliest notice of a Syriac Gospel is found in Eusebius’s
_Ecclesiastical History_, iv. 22. That historian mentions that
Hegesippus (c. 160-180) quotes certain things from the Gospel of the
Hebrews—_i.e._ of the Palestinian (?) Jewish Christians, and from the
Syriac (_sc._ Gospel), and particularly from the Hebrew dialect, showing
that he himself was a convert from the Hebrews (ἔκ τε τοῦ καθ’ Ἑβραίους
εὐαγγελίου καὶ τοῦ Συριακοῦ καὶ ἰδίως ἐκ τῆς Ἑβραΐδος διαλέκτου τινὰ
τίθησιν, ἐμφαίνων ἐξ Ἑβραίων ἑαυτὸν πεπιστευκέναι). This can hardly be
understood otherwise than as implying that a Syriac version was already
in existence. Whether it contained all the four Gospels or only one of
them, or Tatian’s Harmony of the Gospels, as Michaelis supposed and as
Zahn has recently shown some ground for believing, or whether it
contained a primitive Gospel, now perished, cannot be established with
certainty.
From the middle of the present century manuscripts of this version have
found their way into European libraries in great numbers. Some of these
are inestimable. At least ten date from the fifth, and thirty from the
sixth century. This is somewhat remarkable when we remember how small a
remnant of the Greek manuscripts has been preserved. G. H. Gwilliam is
at present engaged on an edition of the Syriac Tetraevangelium for the
University of Oxford on the basis of forty manuscripts. The task might
seem to be an easy one, considering that these Syriac manuscripts
display a far greater unanimity in their text than is found in any
written in Greek. The difficulty in their case lies in another
direction.
[Sidenote: Curetonian.]
In the year 1842 a Syriac manuscript containing considerable portions of
the Gospels was brought from Egypt and deposited in the British Museum.
It was afterwards published by Dr. Cureton in 1858 with the title
“Remains of a very antient recension of the four Gospels in Syriac
hitherto unknown in Europe.” Cureton himself thought he had discovered
the original of St. Matthew’s Gospel in this version. While this was
easily shown to be a mistake, the question as to the relationship
between the Curetonian Syriac and the Peshitto, whether the two texts
are independent of each other, or if not, which is the earlier and which
the recension, is not yet decided.
[Sidenote: Lewis.]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account