For this publication, a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license has been granted by the author(s), who retain full copyright.
Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies is an electronic journal dedicated to the study of the Syriac tradition, published semi-annually (in January and July) by Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute. Published since 1998, Hugoye seeks to offer the best scholarship available in the field of Syriac studies.
The Peshitta: Its Use
in Literature and Liturgy. The aim was to gain a more
detailed and comprehensive picture of the textual history of
the Peshitta of the Old Testament by discussing its
preservation in the patristic literature of the Syriac
churches. In the words of the conveners, "As much progress has
been made on the Syriac Fathers …, it is time to see
where we stand: what has been done so far in this respect, what
should be done, and how can we integrate the results of this
research into the picture that has been formed on the basis of
Bible manuscripts." This focus intentionally embraced related
issues such as the development of the Peshitta text as "an
event within the history of the Syrian Churches," and "the way
the Peshitta was received and assessed by its users, whether in
exegetical or historical literature or in liturgy." Attention
to the New Testament was also welcomed as an inseparable part
of the symposium's focused exploration.
Between the School and the Monk's Cell: The Syriac
Commentary Tradition; Sebastian Brock, The Use of the
Syriac Versions in the Liturgy; and Bill Petersen,
Problems in the Syriac New Testament and How Syrian Exegetes
Solved Them. The first evening ended with a slide
presentation by Mat Immerzeel on The Cross on the Banner:
Christian wall Paintings in Lebanon and Syria.
Sebastian
Brock, University of Oxford
The first part concentrated on the developments over the centuries in how texts intended for liturgical reading were presented. Five main stages in this development were identified in the manuscript tradition.
The second part looked at three different aspects: (1) some liturgical terms specific to the Syriac tradition which had their origins in the Syriac biblical text. Here the following terms were covered: rushma (< Ezek 9:4), rahhep (< Gen 1:2), aggen (< Luke 1:35, John 1:14), shra (with possible links with the Palestinian Targum tradition) and the biblical sources for lbesh pagra and similar phraseology. (2) The textual basis for certain terms and phrases. Here the following were discussed: Christ as the "Ancient of Days"; the title "King Messiah"; various phraseological links with the Palestinian Targum tradition; "the bars of Sheol" (replacing "the gates" in Matt 16:18); and "the bridal chamber" (replacing "the wedding feast" in Matt 25:10). (3) Some exegetical aspects. Here a few examples were given of the deliberate linking of different passages by means of the transfer of distinctive vocabulary - with a warning to the textual critic in search of variants in the biblical texts. Finally, brief attention was drawn to the existence, above all in the East and West Syriac Festal Hymnaries, of some fine poetry (albeit in truncated form, especially in the printed editions): for the full, or fuller forms, reference to the earliest manuscripts available is essential. The paper ended with a quotation from an otherwise unknown poem on Genesis 22, to be found in an East Syriac Burial Service for Children.
Aspects of the Commentary on Numbers by Išo'dad of Merv
Johann Cook,
Universiteit Stellenbosch
le
commentaire d´ IŠO`DAD de Merv sur l´Ancient
testament) is the most prominent in this regard. He has
translated many of this ancient author's commentaries and in
the process offered many useful remarks. Clarke, Van Rompay,
Molenberg, Ter Haar Romeny and others have also dealt with
aspects of this prominent Syriac author. However, these
scholars mostly addressed the relationship between different
ancient authors. Clarke, for example, compared IŠO`bar
Nun with IŠO`DAD of Merv and Theodore bar Koni.
These comparisons were moreover primarily executed in
regards to the book of Genesis. As a matter of fact not much
has been done in connection with the 4th book of the
pentateuch, Numbers, which is the subject of this contribution.
This paper, which is limited in intent and extent, will deal
with aspects of the exegetical method of the mentioned Syriac
commentary. Others have defined the exegetical approach of
IŠO`DAD as belonging to the genre of questiones. This
certainly applies to the book of Genesis. However, in Numbers
the author applies a seemingly additional exegetical stylistic
feature. He quotes words from Scripture like qry' in
II,2 and then offers an explanation. Or in III, 26: glg'
[plural]: "According to John they are the branches of the
wood......". This seems to be related to the Pesher exegetical
method found at Qumran. IŠO`DAD also makes frequent
references to scripture, interpreting scripture by means of
scripture. Cf. for example: I, 50: "Concerning the tent of
tabernacle, scripture says: Like one who......". The particle
lm is used as well as the verbal form 'mr. In
trying to define its genre Molenberg talks of scholia
and aporiai in this regard.
This paper will at the same time act as a pilot study for a planned monograph on the Peshitta version of Numbers.
The Greek vs. the Peshitta in a West Syrian Exegetical Collection (BL Add. 12168)
Catalogue, 2:904-908). The work, which may be called the
London Collection, consists of extracts from various,
mostly Greek authors. The choice of authors quoted gives a good
impression of its profile. For the Pentateuch we find the names
of Cyril of Alexandria, Severus of Antioch, Gregory of
Nazianzus, and Ephrem; for the Prophets, Athanasius, Cyril,
Severus, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nyssa, John Chrysostom,
and Ephrem. In other words: some of the more moderate
Alexandrians, the moderate Antiochene Chrysostom, the
Miaphysite leader Severus, the Cappadocians, and finally Ephrem
as the only Syrian authority.
The London Collection quotes the biblical text in a
number of instances from the Syro-Hexapla; at other places it
seems to give a direct translation from the Greek biblical text
of the commentaries quoted; and in yet other instances it
quotes the Peshitta. The compiler also added an appendix on the
various Greek versions, comparable but not identical with Moses
bar Kepa's discussion of this subject. This paper will discuss
the position of the London Collection in the
contemporary debate on the right version of the biblical
text.
As in most Jewish-Christian dialogues from the ancient
period the bulk of the Disputation is taken up with arguments
about the relevance of biblical texts to the situations of the
Christian Church and the Jewish people. It contains over 340
biblical quotations, the bulk of them (300) from the Old
Testament. Some of these are quite extensive in scope. It also
contains a number of quotations from an otherwise unattested
Syriac version of books 1-5 of Josephus' War of the
Jews; book 6 of this version is preserved in 7a1 as the
fifth Book of the Maccabees.
The Old Testament biblical quotations in the Disputation fall naturally into four groups:
This paper deals with the implications for the history of the Peshitta OT of the form of the text cited in the Disputation but also with the way in which the results of the Peshitta Project can, in their turn, be used to help with the dating of patristic texts and manuscripts. It attempts to show that:
Kristian Heal,
Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah
Konrad Jenner,
Universiteit Leiden
ho
Suros in Eusebius of Emesa, but in the Old Testament
quotations contained the early Syriac versions of the New
Testament. As has been known for a long time, these quotations
often conform to the OT Peshitta, a tendency leading at times
to marked divergence from the Greek NT text. Recent research
has shown that this phenomenon is due to the habit of the first
Syriac translators of the NT-Tatian for the gospels, anonymous
translators for the other books-who followed the local OT text
in OT quotations.
The use of the Syriac OT in the Syriac NT sheds light on the date and milieu of the OT Peshitta and on the origins of Syriac speaking Christianity. Another implication is that the text of OT quotations in the Syriac NT must be considered an important witness to the text of the OT Peshitta. This last point, which has been almost entirely neglected by textual critics of the OT Peshitta, will be illustrated with a couple of examples showing that the Syriac NT may at times have preserved primitive OT Peshitta readings no longer transmitted by the manuscripts of the OT Peshitta.
The Syriac Massora and the New Testament Peshitta
Andreas Juckel,
Institut für neutestamentliche Textforschung,
Münster
The first period of the Peshitta is a period of 'revision', dominated by the development towards the Greek text, culminating in the 'Philoxenian' (507/08) and the 'Harklean' (615/16) versions which both update the Peshitta according to an increasing 'Greek' standard. Variants of the Peshitta might be due either to Greek influence (in the proper sense) or to the influence of the two fellow versions. For editorial policy this background offers the general guideline to follow the non-grecizing reading of the 'majority text' (and to allow for the possibility of non-grecizing variants to be more original than the 'majority text'). The second period of the Peshitta is a 'philological' one and corresponds with the new political and cultural situation under Islamic rule. Now the Peshitta is the 'Syriac' bible (the Harklean the 'Greek') contributing to 'Aramaic' identity. It is subjected to 'scientific' care, the orthographical features are regularlized, the pronunciation is fixed by the invention of vowel signs. The 'spiritus rector' of this period is James of Edessa, its philological handbook is the 'Massora' (extant in 15 manuscripts) which relies on principles introduced by James.
By paying attention to 'massoretic' features in Peshitta manuscripts (orthography, variants recorded by the 'Massora', etc.) editorial policy will be able to distinguish 'pre-massoretic' manuscripts from those of obvious 'massoretic' imprint. This does not constitute a 'history' of the Peshitta text but will improve the judgement upon an 'early' and a 'later' stage of the Peshitta (F.J.A. Hort: 'Knowledge of documents should precede final judgement upon readings'). Remarks on the OT quotations in the NT, on the 'Massora' and on James of Edessa quoting the NT will reflect the implications of an editorial policy based on a 'qualified minority of pre-massoretic manuscripts'.
eBeth Arké: The Syriac Digital Library and the Reception of the Peshitta in Literature and Liturgy
George Kiraz,
Beth Mardutho
eBeth Arké is a collection of out-of-copyright
publications (books and articles) digitized in eBook form. The
collection will be made available on the Internet as an
eLibrary. A great deal of the material deals with the Peshitta
and its usage in literature and liturgy. This presentation will
give a general description of the project with emphasis on the
literary and liturgical material that pertain to the Peshitta.
A proposal will be given to add tools that facilitate searching
Peshitta quotations in the eLibrary with the use of metadata
and markup languages. The speaker will solicit feedback from
scholars to make the project useful for the study of Peshitta
texts in literature and liturgy.
Arie van der
Kooij, Universiteit Leiden
Marinus Koster,
Bathmen, The Netherlands
In this paper I should like to call attention to Aphrahat's
frequent use of typology as a method of exegesis. In
that case persons and happenings from the Old Testament are
conceived as a prototype (typos; cf. Rom. 5:14 [Adam], 1
Cor. 10:6 [the following rock; it happened tepikw, v.
11]) of their New Testament counterpart (antitypos/n;
cf. 1 Peter 3:21 [baptism]). In contrast with the allegorizing
method, here the concrete persons, things and happenings are
considered as hidden prefigurations of what is revealed in the
gospels around the person of Jesus Christ. In the eyes of the
author, this is guaranteed by the intrinsic connection which
exists between the two covenants, those of Moses and Jesus.
E.g. the 'tree' (piece of wood) thrown by Moses into the water
of Marah in order to sweeten it (Exod. 15:25) is seen as a
prefiguration (Syriac
twps' or
This exegetical device, employed already by Justin, Irenaeus
and others, was made his trade-mark by Aphrahat, who used it in
several homilies (IV [Jacob], XII, XXIIf. [Moses], VI [Eliah],
XI [Joshua]), but in particular in hom. XXI, which for the
greater part consists of a long list of OT exemplary persons
(as indicated above), all of them interpreted typologically. I
will concentrate on some of these: Moses, Joshua, Eliah and
Eliza. Regularly, the characteristic Steigerung
(Goppelt) between the OT exemplar and its NT counterpart will
come to the fore.
David Lane, New
Galloway, United Kingdom
However the evidence does not support this argument. As in the case of Shubhalmaran's general use of Scripture, and Aphraat's use of Leviticus, quotations are shaped not by their original source but by the author's manipulation of quotations to support his argument. The genre of scripture quoted is an element of the argument which uses it. Some short quotations are careful and close to the Peshitta, but longer ones are often summaries or selections, with the order changed if felt necessary. The appeal is less to the exact words than to the general sense, or even inferences drawn from them.
Quotations from Leviticus are found in:
Hence the literature quoted, and (even more) the argumentative context, are the determining factors in shaping quotation. "Citation très libre" is a consequence of rhetoric rather than failure of memory; exactness is required only when a specific word or short phrase is needed in close exegesis.
Ephraem and the 'Greek Bible'
Christian
Lange, Otto-Friedrich-Universität, Bamberg
Vetus Syra-and whether 'Ephraem', consequently, is aware
of the Syriac version of the separate Gospels. It is the aim of
this paper to analyse the quotations in the Syriac Commentary
on the Diatessaron and to attempt an answer to the question of
the identity of that Biblical version. Although the chronology
of the Syriac versions of the New Testament makes it obvious
that the Syriac version of the New Testament referred to in the
Syriac Commentary on the Diatessaron cannot be identified as
the Peshitta, the wider theme of the Symposium-the use of the
Fathers for the reconstruction of the text of the Syriac
Bible-might justify the main question of this paper.
Clemens
Leonhard, Universität Wien
Timothy I, the great Catholicos of the Church of the East (died 823) tells in one of his letters about his efforts to provide a copy of the Syrohexapla for the school of Bet Lapat. Thus, he introduced an important tool for textual criticism into the academies of the Church of the East. In his commentary, Ishodad sometimes quotes the Syriac translations of other biblical versions ('the Greek', 'the Hebrew') part of which he probably copied from the Syrohexapla. Even the Syriac translation of Theodore's commentary may add 'the Greek' version after the lemma from the Peshitta at the beginning of a paragraph of interpretation. Ishodad also used these attestations of the 'Greek' text. The second objective of this paper is to provide a description of Ishodad's use of such variant readings and suggestions to their provenance.
Ishodad's Knowledge of Hebrew as Evidenced from His Treatment of Peshitta Ezekiel
Jerry Lund,
Hebrew Union College - Jewish Institute of Religion,
Cincinnati
cibraya) 7 times. The 7 cases
of 'the Hebrew' can be divided into 3 typological categories: a
reference to 'the Hebrew' as the source of the Syriac version
which we call the Peshitta (28:10); references to Hebrew words
(1:1; 20:29; 43:15); and references to Hebrew versional
readings which differ from the Syriac (1:18; 9:2; 25:9). These
case will be presented and analyzed with an attempt made to
identify the source of Ishodad's Hebrew knowledge. In addition,
a key case where Ishodad should have evoked the Hebrew, but did
not, will be examined. From this study, an answer to the
question about the extent of Ishodad's knowledge of Hebrew-what
he knew and what he did not know-will be suggested.
Furthermore, implications about the modern critical approach to
the Peshitta will be drawn.
Craig Morrison,
Pontifical Biblical Institute, Rome
The Acts of Judas Thomas offers Peshitta
scholars a window into the Syriac Bible and its interpretation
in the third century. Where this symposium focuses on the text
of the Peshitta in what might be called the 'proto-Peshitta'
period, the source text for the biblical citations and
allusions in this early Syriac narrative becomes of interest.
A.F.J. Klijn's assessment of these citations provides a point
of departure: 'we may suppose that originally a Diatessaron was
used in quoting the New Testament. At a later stage the text
was adapted to the separate gospels' (The Acts of
Thomas, [NT.S 5; Leiden 1962] 17). This conclusion was
repeated by W. Petersen who noted: 'to date, no comprehensive
study of the gospel citations in the Acts has been
conducted' (Tatian's Diatessaron, [VC.S 25; Leiden 1994]
215). The Acts explicitly cites the New Testament seven
times in addition to its version of the 'Our Father'. Two
citations that depart significantly from the Greek and Latin
canonical traditions and from the Peshitta are examined with a
view to establishing whether they derive from the Diatessaron
or from the Vetus Syra. The first example is taken from
§28: 'Therefore how much will he care for you, you of
little faith' (kma haki claykun netbtel leh hsiray haymanuta) and is a citation of
Matt 6,30 and Luke 12,28. The second example is taken from
§144 and involves the plus 'and our sins'
(
Shinichi Muto,
Shiga, Japan
Among Greek Antiochenes, this study focuses on Diodore of
Tarsus, Theodore of Mopsuestia and, above all, John Chrysostom,
because his related texts are numerous and extant in original
Greek. According to Chrysostom, the Bible is not difficult or
ambiguous. In the case of seemingly unclear passages, the
author himself explains them on condition that readers
attentively follow the intention of the text. Even if a
biblical writer does not explain them, other biblical writers
instead can do so. So it is not Chrysostom who interprets
Scripture, but Scripture which interprets itself. His audience
cannot easily oppose such an interpretation.
With regard to Syriac Fathers, this study treats Aphrahat and,
especially, Ephrem of Nisibis in whose works many related
passages can be found. According to Ephrem, since God bestowed
many images of the biblical words in proportion to preferences
of interpreters, they understand only a tiny portion of the
whole. Benefits for everyone are hidden for his meditation; he
learns step by step. Interpretations are made according to the
interpreters' capacity. So there is no particular
interpretation valid for anyone at any time.
This study concludes with a comparison between the Greek Antiochenes and the Syriac Fathers. As the former tend to teach their hearers the one true interpretation of a certain passage in the Bible, the latter are more open to learn many other possibilities of interpretations. Between these lie fundamental dissimilarities so that one should not regard the Syriac hermeneutics as an Antiochene type.
The Book of Proverbs in Aphrahat's Demonstrations and in the Liber Graduum
Robert J.
Owens, The General Theological Seminary, New York
Demonstrations (337-345 CE) and the Liber
Graduum (ca. 400) both pre-date the earliest extant Ms of
Peshitta Proverbs (6h16). The primary surviving Mss of the
Demonstrations also pre-date 6h16, although those of the Liber
Graduum do not.
Within Aphrahat's work, twelve different passages contain quotations of portions of the following Proverbs passages: 9:9; 10:10, 27; 11:5, 31; 16:19, 32; 18:19; 20:6, 9; 25:21; 28:2, 13, 16; 29:23. Within the Liber Graduum, six different passages contain portions of Proverbs 10:12; 17:5; 18:10; and 24:17. Though not set apart as distinct lemmata, all of the Aphrahat quotations are formal, being introduced by one of his standard formulas of Scripture citation, such as 'as it says,' 'as it is written,' etc. Three of the Liber Graduum quotations are so introduced.
As is typical of the biblical quotations throughout both works, these Proverbs texts are imbedded within the author's own extended prose, calling into question their literalness. None of these citations reproduces an entire verse. In earlier publications, R. Owens has discussed the difficulty that confronts the scholar who seeks text-critical witness in Aphrahat's biblical. On the one hand, Aphrahat obviously quotes casually or from memory much of the time, calling up only a clause or phrase, sometimes adapting the wording slightly to fit the vocabulary, or conflating similar passages. On the other hand, his quotes are full of apparently exact reproductions of substantial portions of the Peshitta text-so full that one cannot be content simply to ignore this early corpus of biblical quotation. Much of this paper is given over to detailed discussion of the methodological problems involved in trying to use such patristic quotations as textual witnesses.
Leaven of Purity and Holiness: The Peshitta of 1Corinthians 5:8 and Christian Self-Definition
Emmanuel
Papoutsakis, Princeton University
William L.
Petersen, PennState University
This paper will examine how some of the great Syrian exegetes (Aphrahat, Ephrem, and Isho'dad, for example) perceived these problems, grappled with them, and eventually solved them. As byproducts of this examination, we will gain insight into their attitudes towards the text, their theology, and their exegetical techniques.
Sirach Quotations in the Discourses of Philoxenus of Mabbug: Text and Context
Wido van
Peursen, Universiteit Leiden
Discourses on Christian Life and Character of the West
Syrian bishop Philoxenus of Mabbug (450-523 AD) contain four
quotations from the book of Sirach. These quotations show some
remarkable differences from the text in the extant Peshitta
manuscripts and some agreements with the Greek text of Sirach.
In this respect the Sirach quotations differ from citations
from Genesis, Exodus, Isaiah, and Psalms in the
Discourses, investigated by R.G. Jenkins in his The
Old Testament Quotations of Philoxenus of Mabbug (Leuven
1989). Some proposals have been advanced to account for the
differences between the text of Philoxenus' quotations and the
Peshitta text. W.D. McHardy claimed that Philoxenus used the
Peshitta text as it is known to us, but quotes in a loose, free
manner, while M.M. Winter argued that Philoxenus possessed a
Philoxenian version of Sirach when he wrote the
Discourses. These proposals will be evaluated in the
light of Jenkins' study. Also other explanations will be
reviewed.
The present paper will further discuss the context of the
quotations and address the question how the Sirach quotations
function in the context of Philoxenus' argument and whether the
context in which Philoxenus uses his quotations agrees with the
context from which they are taken.
Some observations will be made about the quotation of Sir.
27:20 in Philoxenus' Letter to the Monks of Senoun and
about the absence of Sirach citations in other products of
Philoxenus' literary creativity, including his commentaries,
his theological and dogmatic treatises, and his numerous
letters.
David Phillips,
Université Catholique de Louvain
Herrie van
Rooy, Potchefstroomse Universiteit
In this study four versions of the references to the Psalms need to taken into consideration: the quotations in Athanasius, the reading of the Septuagint, the Peshitta and the Syriac version of the commentary. With regard to the references in the Greek version of the commentary, one must keep in mind that the whole Psalm is not quoted in the commentary, only a selection of references necessary for the comments made on the Psalm. It is clear that Athanasius used the LXX, but his text may contain unique variants, such as the plus at the beginning of the heading of Psalm 24(25). In this instance the heading in the Syriac commentary does not contain the plus. The Syriac commentary may add some of the portions omitted in the Greek commentary, such as the last part of Psalm 24(25):1. The Syriac may also agree with the Peshitta in instances where the Peshitta differs from the Greek, such as at the end of the first line of Psalm 24(25):2.
It is clear that the references in the Syriac commentary display a variety of possibilities and each reference must be considered on its own. It is possible that the version of the Psalms reflects the translation of Philoxenus, or at least a related translation by the translator of the commentary.
The Reception of the Peshitta Psalter in Bar Salibi's Commentary on the Psalms
Stephen Ryan,
Harvard University
This paper studies several related aspects of the reception of the Peshitta Psalter in Bar Salibi's 'Commentary on the Psalms.' I will first review the evidence for the traditional scholarly position that Bar Salibi used the Peshitta for the factual commentary and the Syro-Hexapla for the mixed commentary on the Psalms. I will demonstrate that Bar Salibi made use of the Syro-Hexapla in a limited and partial way and that he did so not because of an ideological conviction but because of the use of this version in one of his sources. Although Bar Salibi did not explain his use of the biblical versions, he did include Moshe bar Kepha's 'Introduction to the Psalms' as a preface to his own commentary. In the final part of the paper I compare the theoretical discussion found in Bar Kepha's preface with the actual practice of Bar Salibi in his commentary.
Obscure Words in the Peshitta of Samuel, According to Theodore bar Koni
Alison
Salvesen, University of Oxford
Liber Scholiorum of Theodore
bar Koni (end eighth century) is appended a list of the
difficult words in that section of the Peshitta, with
explanations. This paper seeks to assess their value, and to
compare them with the approach of Jacob of Edessa, the earlier
West Syriac writer.
Aho
Shemunkasho, Mor Jakob von Sarug Theologisches Seminar,
Warburg
sh himo) of the
Syrian Orthodox Church found its form, as we know it today,
certainly after the last Syriac translation of the Bible
undertaken by Thomas of Harqel in AD 616. This means that the
prayers and songs of the Breviary were finally collected and/or
composed at a time when all six versions of the New Testament
were in existence; namely the Diatessaron, the Old Syriac
Gospels, the Peshitta, the Philoxenian, the Harklean, and the
Syro Palestinian. One can see from the text and themes that the
Breviary is clearly rooted in the Bible. The themes are related
to the classical structure of the Breviary; namely seven
prayers a day, dominated by prayers related to Mary, the
Apostles and Saints, penitents and to the deceased. Each of
these subjects refers to many biblical passages. While most of
the biblical references allude to the Bible, only a small
number are direct quotations.
The question rises as to which biblical versions have been used in the composition of these prayers and chants, and in particular, how much the Peshitta has influenced the Breviary. This paper will try to throw some light on the question. Furthermore, it will deal with the development of the Peshitta's terminology in the Breviary. It will, however, only consider Gospel citations and allusions. Biblical references to the Old Testament and the rest of the New Testament are not taken into consideration. Also the work is based on the printed versions of the Breviary and does not consider the various number of manuscripts.
The Psalm Headings in the West Syrian Tradition and the Psalm Commentary of Daniel of Salah
David G.K.
Taylor, University of Birmingham
Jan Van Reeth,
Mortsel, Belgium
El 'Elyôn, derived
from the epithet of God, 'ly, which was widely spread in
the south-western Semitic area (Syriac and Arab desert). This
was further combined with the definition of his creative
function: He who is 'the possessor of heaven and earth'.
Lucas Van
Rompay, Duke University
Biblical commentaries span the whole period of Syriac
literature. Unlike most other compositions, they were created
and used in close contact with contemporary biblical
manuscripts, which both the redactor and reader must have had
on their desk. Biblical commentaries, therefore, are the first
field to which the student should turn to complement his or her
study of biblical manuscripts.
After a brief survey of the existing commentaries, their
distinctive features, and the state of the research, we will
ask ourselves how the commentary tradition can be integrated
into the field of Peshitta studies. Three avenues will be
explored.
In addition to these observations, a few more general
questions related to the Syriac commentary tradition will be
touched upon, e.g. the definition of the genre, the
relationship to non-Syriac biblical commentaries, and the
Sitz im Leben of the commentaries, with special
attention to the schools and monasteries.
Baby Varghese,
Orthodox Theological Seminary, Kottayam, Kerala
The Bible quotations in the West Syrian Anaphoras can be
classified into three groups:
The central part of the anaphora (Sanctus-Institution-Anamnesis-Epiklesis) needs particular attention, as it is the oldest stratum, which remained rather less modified.
Several Bible quotations reached Syriac Anaphoras through the Syriac version of Saint James. Greek Saint James quotes from LXX and the Greek NT, often without much alteration. Some of the quotations of Greek St James seem to have been borrowed from the so-called 'Clementine Liturgy' of the Apostolic Constitutions.
The West Syrians have made a literal translation of Greek St James with its Bible quotations. They have rarely made attempts to correct the quotations to make them conform to the Peshitta or the Harklean Versions. Thus in a few pre-tenth century anaphoras, the prayers of Saint James (with the Bible quotations) were often quoted directly or were simply paraphrased.
The anaphoras that were originally composed in Syriac gives more or less accurate quotations from the Peshitta, Harklean, Old Syriac and other unidentified versions. However, Saint James served as the model for quoting the Bible. Thus we can find a tendency to conflate different Bible passages. The Institution narrative is an example of mixing elements from different NT passages.[Eg. 1 Cor.11; Institution Narratives in the Synoptic Gospels, and the accounts of the multiplication of the bread]. Later anaphoras borrowed phrases from anaphoras translated from Greek. This makes the text-critical assessment of the quotations a rather difficult task.
Progress Report on the Peshitta Programme Presented at the Conclusion of the Conference
Dr. K.D. JENNER
Director of the Peshitta Programme
Head of the Peshitta Institute Leiden
E mail: Jenner@let.LeidenUniv.NL
13 August 2001
Dear Colleagues,
It is a distinctive honour to the Peshitta Institute to inform you about the progress of the Peshitta Programme.
Looking back at the past three years of the Peshitta programme, the following remarks are to be made about parts III and IV. In 1998 Vol. IV/2, the books of Chronicles, has been published. The publishing of Volume IV/4, containing Ezra Nehemia and I+II Maccabees, has first priority now. The schedule for this volume is that preparations for printing will be finished in the end of this year, and that it will appear in Spring 2002. A substantial portion of the text of volume III/2 (containing Jeremiah, Lamentations, the epistles of Jeremiah and Baruch, and the book of Baruch) is almost ready for printing. The same holds true for Vol. IV/1, containing Ruth, Susanna, Esther, Judith and Ben Sirah, though we cannot keep secret that portions of the collations still need verification. Moreover, the copy for one of the smaller books of this volume is still wanting. For the moment the publishing of volume IV/5, containing 3+4 Maccabees and the Odes of Solomon, has low priority. Anyway, the editor for this volume has not yet finished his work.
Some years ago, after consultation of Dr. S. Brock, it was decided to add an extra volume to the Editio Major. This volume will contain collations of the MSS from the 13th - 15th century (perhaps some 16th century MSS will also be included), addenda and corrigenda. In the near future the Peshitta Institute will invite participants in the project of the Editio Major to deliver their collations for this period, as far as they have not yet done this. If necessary for the preparation of this volume as well as for the revision of the Preliminary List and its subsequent official edition, we will request to return the films that were given in loan.
In the meantime much work has been done for the fifth part of the edition, that is the Concordance. We hope to publish the second volume next year. On their request Dr. W. Th. van Peursen has joined the present General Editors, Professor P.G. Borbone and Dr. K.D. Jenner. Dr. Van Peursen had been recommended for his expertise and qualifications in linguistic and computer assisted studies in the field of Semitic languages.
As preparations for the scholarly Edition of the Peshitta commenced under the aegis of IOSOT, it had already become an accepted presumption that Syriac commentatory and liturgical literature might provide additional and text-critically relevant data for the establishment of the text. Time was not yet ripe then, however, to commence a broad, thourough and systematic study of the reception of the Syriac Bible. In the meantime a number of scholars have undeniably proved the importance of this material. The studies in question, however, were still concerned with isolated details and remained restricted to smaller portions of the text. Recently, Dr. R.B. ter Haar Romeny has made an extensive pilot study of the commentatory literature and has irrefutably affirmed the previous presumptions. Thus, on mature deliberation, the Peshitta Institute has come to the conclusion that time is ripe now to make concrete the intention of the late Professor P.A.H. de Boer and Dr.W. Baars. In line with this conclusion the present General Editors, Dr. K.D. Jenner and Professor A. van der Kooij, have planned to add a sixth part to the text edition, containing the data from the sources in question. They have invited Dr. R.B. ter Haar Romeny to share in the responsibility for this part of the text edition, since he is an internationally acknowledged expert in this field, and last but not least knows the ins and outs of the edition and programme in progress.
Text Edition, Concordance, and Concise Survey of the Reception will be of great help for two other projects: the New English Annotated Translation of the Syriac Bible, and the Editio Critica. In line with the ackowledgement of the first project by IOSOT at the Business Meeting in Oslo (1998) the Peshitta Institute started inviting scholars recommended by the General Editors of this project. The invitation is done on the basis of a sample that has been prepared by Dr. A. Salvesen. Inviting participants is still in progress. Meanwhile Dr. ter Haar Romeny has joined the present General Editors, Dr. K.D. Jenner, Professor J. Joosten and Dr. A. Salvesen; he will assist them with regard to the Syriac commentatory and related literature. Dr. G. Greenberg has been invited to take care for the uniformity of the English translation and has thus joined the Editorial Board.
After due consideration the Peshitta Institute came to the conclusion that the planned Editio Minor should not present the BTR type of text as in the Editio Major. There are strong arguments now to establish a critical text and to make the Editio Minor an Editio Critica. Consultation of Dr. A. Juckel from Münster made clear that it is to be preferred to combine the critical minor editions of OT and NT. Activities regarding the OT will be co-ordinated by Leiden and those related to the NT by Münster. For the present the doctors Ter Haar Romeny, Jenner, Juckel and Van Peursen are acting as General Editors for the intended edition.
In the meantime the Peshitta Institute made preparations for
a project on linguistic and syntactical study of the Peshitta.
This project, the Computer Assisted Linguistic Analysis of
the Peshitta (CALAP), has started in cooperation with the
Free University of Amsterdam. The participants in this project
are Drs. J.W. Dyk, P.S.F. van Keulen, and W.Th. van Peursen and
Mr. C.J. Sikkel. Dr. K.D. Jenner and Prof. E. Talstra supervise
this project which is financially supported by the Netherlands
Organization for Research.
As you may have noticed, the past period four volumes of the
Monographs of the Peshitta Institute Leiden have appeared.
Recently Dr. R.B. ter Haar Romeny has been appointed Executive
Editor, and the scope of the series has been broadened as may
be clear from the added sub-title: Studies in the Syriac
Versions of the Bible and their Cultural Contexts. To be
clear: the series will thus be open for studies on the Syriac
NT as well. Last but not least we may draw your attention to it
that this series will also include the edition of the text and
annotated translation of Jacob of Edessa's Revised Bible.
Anybody who intends to publish a similar work in the Monographs
of the Peshitta Institute is invited to consult Dr. Ter Haar
Romeny.
Last but not least I may draw your attention to the activities regarding the collection of xeroxes of publications on the Syriac Bible and the large collection of films of Syriac biblical and related manuscripts in the Peshitta Institute. We try to get digitized not only the xeroxed publications but also the films. Together with bibliographical data, surveys of biblical references in studies o the Syriac bible and Syriac liturgy these digitized collections will form the so-called Peshitta Database. Yesterday Mr. Keath Healy and I have discussed the possibilities with regard to digitize the manuscripts and in the near future Dr. Kiraz and I will consult each other as to digitalizing the xeroxed publications. In the meantime you may have noticed that the Peshitta Institute presents the bibliographical references to recent publications on the Syriac bible and its cultural and liturgical context to the Executive Editor of the Journal of the Aramaic Bible.
With all good wishes,
yours sincerely,
Konrad D. Jenner