Page images
PDF
EPUB

posed of the labors of several translators, we can only place the beginning of its gradual formation in that age.""

It is still a matter of controversy to decide to what nation, or to what religion, its author belonged. Simon thinks he was a Jew. Dathe calls him a Jewish Christian. According to Kirsch and Michaelis, he was a Christian. Eichhorn thinks all these theories might be united by supposing it made by a Jew, born in Syria, and converted to Christianity, if it were probably the work of one man. Gesenius and Hirzel produce satisfactory arguments for believing its author was a Christian. Eichhorn and Bertholdt think there were several authors.

Its internal structure is a proof that it has been compiled from the labors of several Syriac translators. Ecclesiastes and the Song of Solomon proceeded from a man who was very familiar with the Chaldee dialect.

.. The translator of the Psalms was evidently a Christian; for he explains Ps. lv. 14 as relating to the Lord's supper. The tone of the translation of the Pentateuch differs from that of the books of Chronicles. For the most part, the style is pure Syriac, like that of Ephraim Syrus; but some portions are full of barbarisms

plain proof that our printed Peshito has grown out of the contributions of several translators.]"

[blocks in formation]

b According to R. Simon, (Hist. crit. du V. T. p. 274,) the author was a Jew; according to Dathe, (Præf. in Psalt. Syr. p. xxiii., sqq.,) a Jewish Christian; according to Kirsch, (Præf. in Pent. p. 6,) and Michaelis, (Abhandlung von der Syr. Sprache, p. 59,) a Christian. See satisfactory grounds in favor of a Christian author in Gesenius, 1. c. p. 85, and Hirzel, De Pent. Vers. Syr. quam vocant Peschito, Indole; Lips. 1825, 8vo. p. 127, sqq.

C

Eichhorn, § 250, sqq. See, also, Bertholdt, p. 596. Ephraim Syrus, ad Jos. xv. 28, seems to suppose there were several authors. See Havernik, 1. c. p. 94, sqq.

It extends over the canonical books of the Old Testament. The Syriac version of the Apocrypha does not belong to this version. It was made from the Hebrew text, to which it adheres closely, and for the most part successfully, and answers to the character of a faithful version far better than the Chaldee. It sometimes allows itself arbitrary interpretations, but never introduces any thing foreign into the text. [It makes mistakes which are possible only on the supposition of a direct use of the original; sometimes it agrees with one ancient version, and sometimes with another. In the main, it follows correct principles of translation, and sometimes contains excellent explanations, which are too little regarded by our interpreters. The incapacity of the Syriac language for poetry, constrained the translator to strip the Hebrew bards of their poetic garment, and to render their sublimest language into dull prose. Finally, the close affinity between the Syriac and Hebrew dialects aided them much in their labor; it offered them the best explanations of difficult Hebrew words, and often permitted them to adhere to the very expressions of the original."

"All the Syrian churches made use of the Peshito as

Ephraim Syrus had not the apocryphal additions to Daniel in his copy. Yet he was acquainted with the Apocrypha. See Lengerke, Daniel, p. cxii., and De Ephraim. Syr. Arte hermeneut. p. 8.

[ocr errors]

Ephraim Syrus, on Jos. xv. 28. Barhebræus, in Asseman, 1. c. vol. iü. p. 274. Hist. Dynast. p. 100. See his unfavorable judgment of this in Præf. Horrei Mysteriorum, and in Liber Splendorum, in Asseman, l. c. vol. ii. p. 279, 281. Carpzov, 1. c. p. 625. Semler thinks this version was made from the Hebrew text of the Hexapla, with the assistance of the versions in the adjoining columns. Vorbereit zur Theol. Hermeneutic, vol. i. p. 382. See Dathe, 1. c. p. 8, sqq. Eichhorn, § 249, sqq.

с

Gesenius, 1. c. p. 81, sqq. Hirzel, l. c. p. 51, sqq. Credner, De Proph. minor. Vers. Syr. quam Peschito vocant Indole; Gott. 1825, p. 82, sqq.

Eichhorn, § 253.

a church version. Only the Western Syrians regarded the Septuagint, also, as of public authority. But it was not prized very highly by all members of the Syriac church, for Gregory speaks very unfavorably of it, though merely on account of his exaggerated esteem for the Alexandrian version, for historical criticism had not then separated the history of the origin of that from the well-known fables connected with it, and superstitious regard for its inspiration found support in the circumstance that the New Testament made such frequent use of it.]"

It often inclines strongly towards the Alexandrian version. This conformity seems in many cases- though not so often as it is sometimes pretended to arise from interpolations. It is also sometimes dependent on the Chaldee paraphrase, especially in the Prophets."

[ocr errors]

[See Eichhorn, § 251. Asseman, l. c. p. 279, sqq.]

R. Simon, l. c. p. 272. Stark, Dav. Carm. vol. i. p. 209. Eichhorn, § 254. Hirzel, p. 100, sqq. Credner (p. 107) and Gesenius think the LXX. was used.

For the criticism of this version, see Collatio Vers. Syr. quam Peschito vocant, cum Fragmentis in Com. Ephraimi sancti obviis, instituta a G. L. Spohn, Spec. i. ii.; Lips. 1785-1794, 4to. Compare the Syriac ecclesiastical version of Amos, in the London Polyglot, with Ephraim's Syriac text in Wahl's Magazin für morg. und bib. Lit. vol. ii. p. 78, sqq. Compare the Peshito text of Job i.-x. in the Polyglot, with the same chapters in Ephraim's Commentary. Compare Wahl, vol. iii. p. 1–7. Credner, 1. c. p. 65. Cæs. a Lengerke, Com. crit. de Ephraimo Syr. ch. ii.

[blocks in formation]

EDITIONS.

- In the Paris Polyglot, by G. Gabriel. Sionita, improved, (?) and enlarged in the London Polyglot. Vet. Test. Syriace, eos tantum libros sistens, qui in canone Hebr. habentur, ordine vero, quoad fieri potuit, apud Syros usitato dispositos. In usum ecclesiæ Syrorum Malabar. jussu Soc. bibl. recognovit et ad fidem codd. MSS. emendavit S. Lee; Lond. 1823, gr. 4to. Pentateuchus Syr. ed. G. G. Kirsch; Lips. 1787, 4to. The Psalms; Libanon, 1585, fol., and 1610. Psalmi Dav. Ed. a Thom. Erpenio; Lug. Bat. 1625, 4to. Notas philol. et crit. addidit F. A. Dathe; Halle, 1768, 8vo. Liber Psalmorum. Ex Idiomate Syro in Lat. transl. a G. Sionita; Par. 1625, 4to.

["Notwithstanding the accuracy with which the Peshito follows the Hebrew, the Greek version of the Seventy," says Eichhorn, "sometimes gleams strongly through the text. From this phenomenon, some have drawn the conclusion that this version has been retouched after the Seventy, and history favors the conjecture....... If the Peshito contains readings, and whole passages, of which no trace can be found in the original; or if the versions from the Syriac incline to the Hebrew, while itself inclines to the Greek; or if one manuscript of the Peshito approaches nearer to the Hebrew, while another follows the Greek; - in such cases, must not criticism suspect there have been later alterations made directly from the Greek, or indirectly from the Syriac descendants of the Greek?

"If the Peshito were free from such interpolations, it would be an unparalleled anomaly in criticism. From Ephraim the Syrian to Gregory Barhebræus, this version was used by the learned writers on the Old Testament, among the Syrians, in common with the Septuagint. .... The Syrians had several translations of the Alexandrian version, with which they could compare the Peshito, and thus these several versions would very naturally be corrupted from one another.

"Still further, Gregory says expressly in his commentary on the Old Testament," that he has altered the Peshito, several times, after the version of the Seventy, which is far better. Jacob of Edessa, in the beginning of the eighth century, and Dionysius Barsalibi, in the middle of the twelfth, revised the Peshito in the same manner."

[ocr errors][merged small]

[Eichhorn thinks, however, that Jacob of Edessa did not revise the Peshito, but a Greek-Syriac version.]

"Yet we must not ascribe every agreement of the Peshito with the Greek to a later recension; for the original author, as a Syrian, may have had some acquaintance with the Septuagint, and sometimes have followed it.""

Many critics consider the Peshito as one of the most valuable of the ancient versions. Kennicott and De Rossi have derived valuable readings from it.]"

§ 65.

IV. DESCENDANTS OF THE PESHITO.

ARABIC VERSIONS FROM THE SYRIAC.

d

1. Some of the Arabic versions in the Paris and London Polyglots have been made from the Syriac; not merely the version of Job and Chronicles, but that also of Judges, Ruth, and Samuel, of 1 Kings i.-xi., of 2 Kings xii. 17—xxv., and Nehemiah ix. 28-xiii., have proceeded from this source. According to Rödiger, Judges, Ruth, Samuel, and 1 Kings i.—xi., were translated by a Christian in the thirteenth or fourteenth century. Different, but Christian authors translated the passages 2 Kings xiii. 17-xxv., and Nehemiah ix. 28-xiii. [Nothing is known of the age or author of the books of Job and Chronicles. This version agrees in general quite closely

• [Eichhorn, § 254, 255.]

с

[See, also, Horne, pt. i. ch. ii. sect. iii. § 3, and his authorities.]

Reprinted by the Bible Society at Newcastle, 1811, in great 4to.

& Eichhorn, § 290.

Aem. Rödiger, De Origine et Indole Arab. Libr. V. T. hist. Interpret.; Hal. 1829, 4to. lib. i. ch. ii.

1 Rödiger, 1. c. § 62, sqq. ch. iv. § 73, sqq. ch. v.

« PreviousContinue »