TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

that it was most influential, and it is in its evidence as to tlie Syriac version that its textual importance now consists. It is only of late years that its evidence has been available at all. Until 1880 it existed only in name, and the very fact that it was a compilation from our four canonical Gospels was a matter of con-troversy. In that year, however, Dr. E. Abbot called attention to the fact that in 1876 Dr. G. Moesinger had published a Latin translation of an Armenian treatise which had been printed so long ago as 1836, and which was in fact St. Ephraem's commentary on the Diatessaron. Subsequently two copies of an Arabic version of the Diatessaron itself were discovered, in Rome and in Egypt, and from these the text was published in 1888, — in a form modified, it is true, by transmission through many centuries and an Arabic version, but still making it possible to draw some con-clusions as to the text and character of Tatian's work.

It is now certain, as a result of the recovery of the Diatessaron, that the Gospels existed in a Syriac dress in the second half of the 2nd cent.; but whether the Diatessaron was the earliest form of the Syriac Gospels, or whether the version represented by Syr.-Sin. and Syr.-Cur. was previously in existence and formed the basis of Tatian's compilation, is still uncertain. The opinion of Syriac scholars at the present day appears to be in favour of the priority of the Diatessaron. Even so the origin of the Old Syriac version can hardly be placed later than a.d. 200, and all its characteristics stamp it as representing a very early type of the Gospel text. For some two centuries it existed side by side with the Diatessaron, the former being known as Evan-gelion-da-Mepharreshe ('the Gospel of the Separated') and the latter as Bvangelion^da-MehalletS (' the Gospel of the Mixed'); and then both alike were superseded by the Peshitta. There is some slight evidence (chiefly in the Armenian version, which was derived from the Syriac, and in references in Syrian authors) of the existence of an Old Syriac version of Acts and Paul (Cath. and Apoc. formed no part of the original Syriac NT) ; but for textual purposes they no longer exist.

13. The Peshitta. — Previous to the discovery of Syr.-Cur., the Peshitta was believed to be the oldest Syriac version, and was sometimes regarded as the queen of all the versions. Its date was supposed to be referable to the 2nd century. Even when the superior claims of Syr.-Cur., and still more of Syr.-Sin., came to be generally (though not quite universally) admitted, the Peshitta was assigned to the 4th cent, at latest, on the ground that traces of it were supposed to be found in the Biblical quotations of St. Ephraem, who died in a.d. 378. Since, however, it has been shown (by Prof. Burkitt, S. Ephraem's Quotations from the Gospel, 1901) that the treatises in which the use of the Peshitta is observable are not the genuine work of Ephraem, this evidence falls to the ground, and there is now nothing to prove the existence of the Peshitta before the 6th century. Its origin may now be assigiied with some confidence to Rabbula, bishop of Edessa 411-435, who is recorded to have made a translation of the NT from Greek into Syriac, and to have been active in suppressing the use of the Diatessaron. This new translation, which was to some extent based on the Old Syriac, but was assimilated to the type of Greek text then current, completely superseded its predecessors, and from this point onwards its use in Syriac literature is universal. It appears in both branches of the Syrian Church (Nestorian and Monoph-ysite), whose quarrel dates back to 431. The name Peshitta means 'the simple,' but whether it was used to distinguish it from its predecessors or its successors is uncertain.

MSS of the Peshifta go back to the century of its ori^n. The earliest with an actual date (which is also the earliest dated Biblical MS in existence) is a copy of some books of the Pentateuch, written in 464 (now in the British Museum;

TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

and the two earliest NT MSS may be assigned to about the same date. Of the Gospels, 125 copies in this veraion are on record; of Acts and Cath. 58, and of Paul. 67; Apoc. (with the four minor Catholic Epp.) was not included jn the Syriac canon. The later MSS reproduce the earlier very faithfully, so that the latest edition (by G. H. Gwilliam, 1901) does not substantially differ from the first (A. Wid-manstadt, 1555).

li.ThePhUoxenian Syriac. — Unlike the Latin Vulgate, the Peshitta was not entirely unchallenged in its suprem-acy. In 508, Philoxenus, Jacobite bishop of Mabug in eastern Syria, caused a new translation of the NT to be made by one Polycarp; but of this nothing has come down to us except the four minor Catholic Epp., which were incorporated into the Peshitta to fill the gap caused by their original omission there, and a single MS of the Apoc. (at Trinity College, Dublin; identified by Dr. Gwynn, and published in 1897). The style of Philox. was free and idiomatic, and the Greek text on which it was based was that of the majority of late MSS.

15. The Harklean Syriac. — In 616 a complete revision of Philox. was made by Thomas of Harkel, who converted its idiomatic freedom into extreme literalness, and added various readings in critical notes, which show an acquaintance with a Greek MS or MSS having a text akin to that of Cod. Bezae and its allies. About 35 MSS of Harkl. are known, dating from the 7th and 8th cent, onwards. The Apoc. which is now incorporated with the Peshitta is probably derived from this version.

16. The Palestinian Syriac. — -Yet another Syriac version exists, but in a different dialect from those hitherto described; for, whereas they all belong to E. Syria, with its centre at Edessa, this is in the Western Aramaic characteristic of Palestine and its neighbour-hood. The extant MSS of it (which are few and gener-ally fragmentary, and mostly discovered within the last 15 years) are mainly lectionaries, and its textual im-portance is slight. Prof. Burkitt has argued, apparently with good reason, that it owes its origin to the efforts of Justinian and Heraclius to abolish Judaism in Palestine in the 6th cent., and that it came again into prominence in the 11th century. The three principal MSS of it are dated in 1030, 1104, and 1118.

On the Syriac versions see especially articles by Woods and Gwilliam in Studia Biblica, vols. i. and iii.; A. S. Lewis, The Four Gospels translated from the Sinaitic Palimpsest, 1894; Gwynn, Apocalypse of St. John in a Syriac Version, 1897; F. C. Burkitt, op. cit., and Evangelion da Mepharreshe, 1904, and art. on 'Text and Versions' in Encyc. Biblica.

17. The Armenian Version. — In connexion with the Syriac NT it will be convenient to mention also the Armenian, which was largely dependent upon it. The earliest translation of which we have definite knowledge seems to have been made by Sahak and Mesrop about A.D. 400, from a Syriac text of the Old Syriac family. After 431 this version was revised by the help of Greek MSS received from Constantinople, which were apparently akin to BS, and thereby the original features of the version were much obscured. The earliest extant MSS belong to the 9th and 10th cent, (from a.d. 887). These usually omit the last 12 verses of Mk.; but one, which has them, has a marginal note assigning them to 'the Elder Ariston,' i.e., presumably Aristion, a disciple of our Lord known to us by a mention in Papias.

On the Armenian version see F. C. Conybeare, art. in Hastings' DB, and J. Armitage Robinson, Euthaliana, 1895.

B. Latin Versions.^ —

18. The Old Latin Version (OL). — As Christianity spread westward, it inevitably came into contact with the Latin-speaking population of the Roman Empire; and a translation of the NT into Latin might naturally be looked for at an early date. Indeed, since the gospel was preached in Rome by St. Paul himself. It might seem reasonable to suppose that Latin versions of the Christian literature would have been required almost as soon as it came into being. But this would be to overlook the bilingual character of the Roman

920