網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

phrasis quædam quam fida versio: quod post tot collationes et correctiones institutas et refictas, etiam nunc in Simplici et Vulgata critici discernunt. Hinc autor alterutrius prorsus ignoratur: et varias quidem in utråque linguâ credibile est extitisse. Discimus enim ex Augustino scripturas in conventibus lectas fuisse, et deinde explicatas, quas explicationes auditores exceperunt, et in literis tradiderunt."-Ridley de Syr. N. F. Vers. Dissert. p. 22, 30.

Though this be deemed mere conjecture, and acknowledged to have no direct support from history; yet it is not unreasonable, nor without claims to attention, as affording the means of solving certain difficulties that occur in the sub ject of the Syriac version.

But however this may have been, there is indisputable evidence to prove that, before the middle of the fourth century, a Syriac version had been made in the dialect of Antioch* of all the books of the New Testament, excepting the second epistle of Peter, the second and third of John, Jude, and the Apocalypse. This version is called by the Syrians Peshito, the literal, or rather, as Mr. Marsh has observed, the correct or

faithful version. It has received in later times the title of Simplex, and by this is now most generally distinguished. The Syrian Christians ascribe to it a very remote origin. Some of them, if we may believe Postell, have asserted that it was written by Mark, though it is most probable that Mark died before the gospel of John was published. Abulpharagius affirms, that it was made in the days of Thadæus; and a Syriac MS. is mentioned by Asseman, as having a subscription explicitly declaring, that "it was finished in the year of the Greeks, 389; that is, in the year of Christ 78,

by the hand of the apostle Achæus.” If by Achæus be meant Aghæus, the successor of Thaddeus, as is most probable, Dr. Ridley remarks that this subscription must be unworthy of credit, as Aghæus died in 48. An observation by Ridley is of importance upon this part of the subject: "Si esset ab Apostolo vel a viro Hierosolymitano Novi Fœderis Traductio, verisimile est eam fuisse in Dialecto Chaldaicâ, quam Ga lilæam Syram Postellus appellat, non in Antiochenâ, ut est hodierna Simplex." But if the Syrians have erred in assign ing to this version too early a date, many learned Europeans have approached too near to the contrary extreme, and detracted too much from its antiquity. Fuller, Grotius, and Vossius, maintained that it was not made till the sixth and seventh century. Renaudot, Le Long, and Wetstein, supposed that the Peshito was no other than a corrected copy of the version of Philoxenus, which we shall soon notice. This opinion the lat ter maintained in the first edition of his Prolegomena, published anonymously; and though, upon being convinced of his error by our countryman Dr. Kippax, he retracted his opinion in the next edition of his Prolegomena, prefixed to his New Testament; yet he there, very unaccountably, retained an argument against the antiquity of the Peshito, which if sound, would bring down its origin to the eighth century, Upon the whole, it appears that a higher date than about the middle of the second century, cannot justly be assigned to it, nor a lower than the middle or beginning of the fourth.

The following remark by Ridley will not be out of place, if inserted here:

The dialects of the Syriac language were originally three; the Aramaan, the Nabathaan, and the Antiochenian; corresponding nearly with the division of the country into Syria Proper, Mesopotamia, and Chaldæa. The first of these dialects was spoken by the Mesopotamians, the second by the people of Nabathæa and the mountainous parts of Assyria, and the last by those of Damascus and Colo-Syria.

The least pure of these was the Nabathean. The Aramaan was brought to considerable perfection at Babylon: in this Daniel and Ezra wrote. After the destruction of Babylon, it was corrupted; and in this corrupted state is distinguished by the term Chaldaic. This was the dialect used by Onkelos and Jonathan in the Targums; and, probably, that which was spoken by Christ and the Apostles. After the destruction of Jerusalem, fresh impurities were added, and another dialect gradually arose, called by the name of Jerusalem. In this were written the Mistma about the year 190, and the Jerusalem Talmud in the year 290. Some of the school of Tiberias having migrated to Babylon, the Aramæan underwent another change, and produced what is called the Babylonian dialect. In this was composed the Babylonian Talmud, published about the year 506.

The third dialect, or that of Antioch, is the most antient of all; in this the sacred writings of the Syrians are composed, and most of the works of their learned men.-Ridley's Diss P. 9, 10.

་་

"Præcipuus hujusce versionis usus est, non ut ipsissima Christi verba exprimeret, Chaldaica quippe usus est ille dialecto, et hæc Antiochena exaratur: sed ut germanus vel verborum vel phrasiam in Græco textu sensus melius innotesceret; quod enim apostoli Syriacè conceperunt, licet Græcè scripserunt, ni expositores Syriacè interpre tati sunt, unde verior in quibusdam locis sensus, quasi è speculo ad animum reflect sunt." Dissert. p. 71.

This version was not known in Europe till the sixteenth century, when Moses of Mardin was sent by Ignatius patriarch of the Maronite Christians to acknowledge the supremacy of the Roman pontiff. He was also charged with the commission of getting the Syriac version printed, and for this purpose he brought with him two MSS. not duplicates; but, as Mr. Marsh supposes, one containing the Gospels; the other, the Acts and the Epistles. The former of these is still preserved in the Imperial library at Vienna. Jean Alberti, better known by the name of Widmanstadt, the most accomplished Orientalist in Europe, prevailed, not without difficulty, upon the emperor Ferdinand I. to be at the expence of the impression; and by the joint care and labour of Moses, Widmanstadt and Postell, the Syriac version was handsomely printed at Vienna, A.D.1555, in 4to. and so as to be a perfect pattern of the Peshito. A thousand copies were struck off, 500 of which the emperor took for himself, 300 were sent into the east, and 200, with 20 dollars, were presented to Moses. This copy is the basis of most of the succeeding editions that have been published. Some unjustifiable liberties have indeed been taken by different editors, and several additions made to the genuine Peshito, Tremellius, who published his valuable edition in 1569, not finding in the Vienna edition, 1 John v. 7. translated it, whence it has been taken by some subsequent editors, and inserted into the text. He also, on the authority of a MS. from the Heidelberg library, altered in many places the text of Widmanstadt. In the edition published in the 5th vol. of the Antwerp Polyglott, several passages were altered from a MS. brought by Postell from the east, and now preserved in the Leyden library. In the year 1627, Lud. de

• This is an error, as will soon appear.

Dieu published the Apocalypse from a MS. formerly belonging to Scaliger, and now in the university library at Leyden. In 1630 Pococke published at Leyden the four epistles wanting in the old Syriac, from a MS. which he found in the Bodleian library.

In the Paris Polyglott, published in 1628-1645, all these parts were added to the text of the Vienna edition, and many alterations made, as Michaelis concludes, from no better authority than conjecture.

In the London Polyglott, which next appeared, the story of the adulteress was, for the first time, inserted, probably from one of the later copies of the Philoxenian version; to which we must now attend. Whether, as Ridley supposes, "adeò erat deformata Syriaca quæ vulgo terebatur Novi Fœderis Versio, ut nová, que a Græcis fontibus accuratiùs dedu ceretur opus esset;" or, as Michaelis conjectures, a desire prevailed of having a version more literal than the Peshito; it is now certain, that in the year 508 a new translation of the Greek Testament into Syriac was undertaken at the suggestion of Philoxenus; or, as he was also called, Xenayas, bishop of Hieropolis or Maberg, by his rural bishop Polycarp.

"Seculo sexto," says Ridley, "jam oriente, in gratiam fortasse Syrorum Orientalium et Interfluvialium suscepta, alia sub auspiciis Philoxeni, a Choroepiscopo suo Porum verborum fideliter exprimens, postca lycarpo adornata'prodibat; que vim Græcobis Alexandriæ cum selectissimis Græcis exemplaribus comparata est corumque variantibus lectionibus instructa. Hae non in Antiochena sed, ut in adnotatione dicitur Aramaa exaratur dialecto, temporum vero lapsu inquinata, quam licet ab erudits Judæis ad Babylonem reversis aliquantum resed Babylonicam appellamus, Chaldaica purgatam, non tamen Aramæam proprie.

quam

locuti sunt Christus et Apostoli ipsius simillimam." Diss. p. 71.

In the beginning of the next century A. D. 616, Thomas of Harkel + undertook to revise and correct this version. For this purpose he went and resided in Alexandria, where the best copies of the Greek Testament were to be found; and there "cum diligentia multa""molestia et solicitudine"-he collated

He is generally called Thomas of Heraclea; it should be rather of Harcelæa, in order that a small town or village in the east may not be confounded with a famous Greek city. ANN. REV. VOL. III.

H

it with two Greek copies of acknowledged accuracy" valde probatis et accuratis." For the conjectures which have been formed concerning these copies, we must refer our readers to Michaelis's Introd. and Marsh's notes. Vol. ii. part i. pages 329-336, and vol. li. part ii. pages 790-797.*

In the twelfth century Dionysius Barsalibæus, bishop of Amida, revised the Four Gospels of the Philoxenian version, and made some additions, upon what authority we do not know he transcribed the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles from the Peshito.

:

Of the Philoxenian version little more was known in Europe, before the middle of the last century, than that it existed. A few MSS. some containing only the Gospels, others only the Acts and the apostolic Epistles, were scattered amongst the principal libraries, and Renaudot and Asseman had called the attention of the learned to the subject, yet little attention had been paid to it. In the year 1729 Mr. S. Palmer, being at Ami da, (Diarbekr) in Mesopotamia, purchased, at a considerable expence, four Syriac MSS. two of which proved to be copies of the Syriac New Testament; one of them the version of Barsalibæus, published in the twelfth century, and the other, the most important, the Philoxenian version, by Thomas of Harkel; these he sent to his friend the Rev. Glocester Ridley, minister of Poplar. Though little, if at all acquainted with the Syriac language, Mr. Ridley soon discovered that he was in possession of a valuable treasure; and, notwithstanding age and infirmities, without a proper instructor, and destitute of books that would have facilitated his labour, he resolutely applied to the study of the Syriac, and not without surprising success. The first use that was made of the MS. that had thus unexpectedly come into Mr. Ridley's possession, was by Wetstein, who was preparing materials for his Greek Testament. Upon hearing of these MSS. he came to England, as he says in his Prolegomena, "elatus in spem, uno intuitu videndi

tres aut quatuor Codices Græcos, mille annorum ætatem superantes, atque ge. minam lectionem asserturos." But he was disappointed. He hastily and unwarrantably formed an idea, that the various readings of the Harcelean + copy were taken ultimately from the Italic version, and having spent fourteen days upon what ought to have employed him at least as many weeks, he returned furnished with imperfect or mistaken extracts for his splendid and useful work. Finding himself incapable of gratifying the wishes of the learned in the publication of this valuable copy, and unsuccessful in his application to Michaelis, to come over and undertake the printing of it in England, Ridley engaged in the laborious task of transcribing the Harcelean copy, and noting in the margin the variations in the Barsalibaan. He had thus completed the Four Gospels, when his increased age and infirmities compelled him to desist, and he presented the original copies and his own manuscript to the university of Oxford. When that learned body resolved that it should be published, the late Dr. Lowth proposed Dr. White as a proper person to undertake the arduous office of conducting it through the press, and happily for the cause of sacred learning, this cele brated professor did not decline the ho nourable labour to which he was invited. The first volume containing the Four Go pels, with a Preface and an Appendix, appeared with great credit both to the university and the editor, in the year 1778. The five first sections of the pieface contain an account of the version, taken chiefly from the learned Dissertation published by Ridley. The sixth section treats on the asterisks, the obelisks, and the marginal readings, of which Ridley had said nothing. The text of the Gos pels is accurately printed from the Harcelean copy, except where there was manifestly a fault, which the editor has corrected from the Barsalibæan and Bod leian copies, subjoining the reading of the Harcelean. Greek readings are printed in the margin, and Syriac read ings at the bottom of the page. A lite

It has generally been imagined by the learned, that there were two revisers of the Phi foxenian version, one in the sixth, and the other in the seventh century. Thomas of Harkel is supposed to have been the first, and contemporary with Philoxenus: the other, whose name is unknown, is said to have published the copy of 616. This error (for such Mr. Marsh has proved it to be), has arisen from a word in one of the subscriptions, which may be rendered either iterum or porro. The former rendering has been commonly adopted; and hence the use of the term bis in the above quotation from Ridley

tal. Heraclean.

ral Latin version by the professor is also subjoined. In the Appendix occur the story of the adulteress, found in the Barsalibean, but not in the Harcelean copy: three notes occurring at the end of the Gospels in the same copy: Dr. Ridley's collations of the Barsalibæan copy, and that in the Bodleian library, accompanied by some remarks by Dr. White: and a description of three MSS. copies of the Philoxenian version belonging to the younger Asseman.

The second volume, containing the Acts of the Apostles, and the Catholic Epistles, was published in 1799, more than twenty years after the appearance of the former volume. This delay was chiefly occasioned by the difficulties which the learned and indefatigable editor had to surmount. Their nature and magnitude will be best seen from his own words:

Bodleiane Bibliothecæ Lexica evolvendi, durus sane et fastidiosus."

the above extract, is followed by a seThe preface from which we have made which are found in the Ridleian MS. lection from the Euthalian sections, with asterisks and obeli, thus affording a decisive proof that these marks were not designed, as Wetstein and Storr supposed, to point out the difference between the readings of the old and new Syriac versions, as these sections are not met with in any copy of the old version.

The appearance of this volume has determined a question concerning the four disputed Epistles, which has been much agitated among the learned: "whether the Syriac version of these Epistles, wanting in the Peshito, but published by Pococke from a MS. in the Bodleian li brary, has the same text as the MS. of Ridley." See Mich. vol. ii. p. 54, with Marsh's notes.-The decision of this question we shall subjoin in Dr. White's own words, prefixed to his annotations on the 2d Epistle of Peter:

"Quo prior hujus operis pars literatorum rivarum favore excepta est, utinam et hæc posterior excipiatur ! quæ si ex omni parte minus absoluta habeatur, doctiores, uti spero,id non tam editoris negligentiæ, quam operis ipsius difficultati, tribuendum censebunt. Cum enim per universam Europam nullum aliud ejusdem exemplar extet, quam Ridleianun manuscriptum, quod quidem Actus et Epistolas contineat, scribæ errores non nisi maximo cum labore corrigi posse nemo non statim intelliget. Ut vero exemplarium defecum quodammodo supplerem, quoties nodas difficilior sese obtulisset, nullam aliam rian mihi apertam esse credidi, quam ut ad analogiam grammaticam recurrerem; aut laca parallela per totum Nov. Test. consuerem et expenderem, unde comparatione facia, aliquid aut certum aut probabile de locis saspectis statueretur. Non leve autem duri laboris solatium fuit, quod, hac ratione usus, tantum profeci, ut perpauca esse existimens, in quibus aliud exemplar desideretur. Quamvis enim in pluribus quam quinquaginta locis vitiosum esse textum, vel e constructione granimaticis legibus minime consentanea, vel ornissione verborum aliquot necessariorum, vel aliorum inutilium insertione valde suspicer, eorum tamen locorum tenebras annotationum luce sic depulisse confido, ut non muita futura esse sperem "Quicquid de hac Epistola dictum sit eoque lectori obscura atque intellectu difficilia dem jure de tribus sequentibus dici potest, sc. relinquantur.-Actuum vero et Epistolarum secunda et tertia Johannis et Jude epistola multo etiam difficilior, quam Evangeliorum singulari, quarum nulla in versione simplice ipsorum Translatio fuit; multa enim loca invenitur.

"De Epistolæ hujus versione non nulla habuerunt viri docti ad hunc usque diem in comperta, non posthac habituri. Primo enim liquet, Epistole hujus versionem, publici juris nunc factam, nihil commune habere cum illa quæ in lucem edita est a Pocockio, A. D. 1630, quæque in Polyglottis Londinensibus, edit. Schaafianâ et alibi jam dudum vulgata extat. Secundo ut missam faciam auctoritatem Epigraphes, ad calcem hujus ut et aliarum Catholicarum subjuncta, diserte auctorem Versionis Philoxenum laudantis; ut hoc præteream, non alium tamen quam Philoxenum eum fuisse satis constat, ex testimonio doctissimi Barsalibai; qui in suis ad bune Epistolam Commentariis, textum suum Philoxenianum ubique exhibet cum hoc nostro omnibus numeris convenientem. Tertio, cum tempore Barsalibæi, qui 12° seculo fere medio vixerit, nulla hujus Epistolæ versio Syriaca extaret, præter unam Philoxenianam, ea profecto que in Polyglottis vulgo circumfertur, magne sibi antiquitatis laudem vindicare non potest, neque proinde in re criticâ multo estimanda est.

saut que si de verbo ad verbum redderentur, Another curious fact is also brought a sensus fieret obscurior, aut quicunque to light by the learned editor; that the a latine transláta legeret varias Græci textus ecciones esse suspiceretur. Accedit, multa various readings of these Epistles, cited Syriaca verba in Actibus et Epistolis adhiberi by Wetstein from his MS. from Aleppo, que in sullo Lexico typis mandato reperiun- exactly coincide with the text of the tur. Hinc labor mihi impositus Manuscripta Ridleian version. "Unde autem," says

[ocr errors]

Dr. White, "mirus ille concensus? An Versionem Philoxenianam earum Epistolarum codex Wetstenianus, ipso igno. rante, exhibebat? Ita sane me tantum non persuasum habeo.”

The third volume of this valuable work, which has lately been published, contains the Epistles of Paul. This is, however, imperfect; the MS. concluding with the first part of the 27th verse of the 11th chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews.

And thus, by the completion of the professor's great and valuable labours, the learned are put in possession of perhaps the only complete copy of a version, which, though it may not be so valuable as the Peshito, must be of consider

able service to sacred literature. It remains now for some able critic to prove the value of this version by collating the various readings in reference to the Greek Testament. All that occur in the Gospels have been discovered by Dr. Storr, and published in the 10th volume of the Repertorium. Dr. Adler too, in his Versiones Syr. has given a very accurate collation of the marginal readings. Why may not our own country have 'the honour of finishing what has been so ably begun abroad, and of ap plying the means now furnished by the skill and industry of the learned editor of this curious and important version, to the further improvement of the sacred text?

ART. II. The Guide to Immortality; or Memoirs of the Life and Doctrine of Christ, by the four Evangelists; digested into one continued Narrative, according to the Order of Time and Place laid down by Archbishop Newcome; in the Words of the established Version, with Improvements; and illustrated with Notes, moral, theological, and explanatory; tendir to delineate the true Character and Genius of Christianity. By R. FELLOWES, A. M. Oxon. In 3 vols. pp. 407, 454, 276.

THE author of the work now before us is no stranger, either to censure, or to praise. Several productions of his pen, distinguished by great freedom of sentiment, and boldness of expression, have already obtained the approbation of those who esteem themselves persons of liberal and enlightened views, and sustained the decided hostility of those, whom Mr. Fellowes has ventured to blame, for implicitly yielding to the influence of human formularies and unscriptural creeds and maxims. The Guide to Immortality breathes the same spirit, and

will therefore meet with the same fate.

By some the author will be commended as a truly Christian divine and by others he will be decried as a heretic of the very first class, if not, as an enemy of the religion of Christ.

Let us hear what Mr. Fellowes says for himself respecting the present work:

I had no sooner perused the clegant Diatessaron of the truly ingenions and learned Dr. White, than I determined, as soon as I could spare time from other occupations, to publish in English a work on a similar plan, though somewhat differing in a part of the arrangement. In the account of the resurrection, I have more closely adhered to the harmony of Newcome, than has been done by Dr. White, who has followed the order of narration suggested by Dr. Townson; but which appears to me, on mature consideration, more perplexing and less sati-façtory than that of Benson and Newcome.

"The utility of such a work, as the preseut, must be universally apparent. In reading the separate histories of the four evange lists, the memory is liable to be oppressed, rative of the same facts and discourses, placed and the attention to be confused by the narin a different order, viewed in different combinations of circumstances, and related with out any methodical discrimination of time and place. But the present work contains every particular of the four evangelical his tories, formed into one cleat, consistent, and continued narrative, according to the or der of time when, and the place where, the his miracles were wrought, and his discourses several events of our Lord's life happened. were delivered Those who have little lesure to peruse many religious books, will accordingly, in these volumes, find every theo logical truth recommended which is neces sary to be known, and every moral duty impressed which is necessary to be pracused. and, in short, they will, I trust, have a faithful and a cheering Guide to Immortality."

These are large and high-sounding promises, and if realized, will entitle the author to universal attention, and universal gratitude: and, though impar tiality obliges us to confess that in our apprehension the performance falls short of the great end here proposed to be attained-much important truth is com municated, and many momentous duties inculcated and enforced, in liberal com ments upon the Christian code.

In conveying to our readers, as the duties of our office require, a fair ac

« 上一頁繼續 »