A brand new edition of the Syriac text of the New Testament (Pshitto) was published this year (2007) by the teaching staff of the Syriac Orthodox Monastery Mor Gabriel near Midyat in the South East of Turkey. It is called Pshitto of Mardin (Pshitto dMardin in Syriac) because it prints the text of a manuscript which is kept in Mardin, in the Church of the fourty martyrs (ms. 35/2, from the 13th century, which had never been printed before).
Mor Gabriel is the oldest Syriac Monastery in the world (founded in AD 397) and has a long scholarly tradition. Philoxenos (ca. 440-523), later bishop of Mabbug and originator of a revision of the Syriac New Testament (i.e. the Philoxenian version) was among its most famous students. Today Mor Gabriel accommodates a school of Syriac language and theology which preserves and passes on the venerable tradition of Syriac Christianity.
The Mor Gabriel edition of the Pshitto is good news for anyone interested in the Syriac Bible. Compared with the widely used UBS-EPF edition of the NT and Psalms, which is admittedly more handy because of its smaller size, the Pshitto of Mardin (ca. 1250 g.!) is a pleasure for the eye. It has a very clear script (vocalized Serto) and an agreeable layout.
The edition prints the text of a single manuscript, but it reports all important differences with the versions.
A few other features make it even more attractive: headings, cross references, parallel passages. Quite remarkable is the age of Jesus which is indicated at the beginning of each chapter in the Gospels, which tells a lot about the view of the publishers on the historicity of the Gospel reports.
Except for an English translation of the introduction the entire book is in Syriac. In the back some important comments by Church Fathers have been included (p. 660-724, unvocalized Serto). Moreover a one page bibliography, a glossary (p. 726-731), 5 maps and 4 photo's of other Pshitto manuscripts are provided.
The Syriac community in Turkey has a history of suffering and persecution. In 1915, at the end of the Ottoman empire, Kurds and Turks massacred a million Syrians, among them the entire community in Mor Gabriel. At present the Syriac Church is surviving or at best slowly recovering in an environment where Christians are often treated as second class citizens. With this situation in mind one paragraph in the introduction is moving:
"All this work we have undertaken is for us, the staff (İsa Gülten, Kuryakos Ergün, Yusuf Beğtas and İsa Doğdu) nothing but an expression of the sincere love we have for the Syriac language and of our love for our brothers and sisters, beloved ones, friends and relatives, who have a discerning understanding, so that they may read easily and meditate readily the life-giving message of our Lord in this dark age when souls are thirsty and lacking in spirituality. We believe that the Syriac people of the 21st century, if they are to become strong and have respect for these matters of life, they must pursue diligently the true understanding of the teaching of Christ, which is hidden in this Holy Book. They must not dive shallowly but deeply into the varied expressions of its life-giving meaning and go back to the essence and the source of their golden era, before the splendid glory of the Syriac civilisation was over."
Apparently biblical scholarship in Syriac Christianity can still go hand in hand with Christian engagement in Church and ministry.
İsa Gülten, chief editor of the Pshitto dMardin, is arch deacon of the Syriac Orthodox Church.
Data:
The New Testament of our Lord Jesus Christ: Text according to the Pshitto of Mardin
Istanbul: Monastery of Mor Gabriel in Cooperation with United Bible Societies, 2007
XV + 731 p. + 5 maps and 4 photographs
Hardcover with dust jacket
ISBN: 978-975-462-059-7
Gie Vleugels
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Monday, November 19, 2007
SBL in San Diego III: New Testament Textual Criticism & Early Christian Manuscript Session on Miniature Codices
The first presenter, Thomas J. Kraus, admitted that he had promised in previous SBL presentations to have a database of miniature codices ready by this year. However, he had now come to realize that there were more serious questions to address before compiling such a list, not least the definition of what constitute a miniature codex - is Turner's old definition (codices not wider than 10 cm) vaild? And what data is relevant to include in a list, and what broader conclusions can be drawn thereof. Kim Haines-Eitzen, who was presiding, aptly summarized these questions in the "what?" (the nature of the miniature codex) and the "why?" (the function) of these codices. The panel and the audience agreed that in order to see if Turner's definition was valid, the net had to be cast more broadly, in the first stages in order to see what categories the extant evidence itself broke down to. Apparently, the panel present, Kim Haines-Eitzen, Malcolm Choat, Ann-Marie Luijenduijk and Thomas J. Kraus were in the first stages of this this joint venture, which first involves compilíng a list, and then try to draw conclusions from these data and answer the questions of significance.
Thus, Kraus went on to present a number of examples of Greek miniature codices, and the kind of data included in his prelliminary list (in various level of detail): 1. Publication, ed.pr., inv. no.; 2. Material; 3. Date; 4. Provenance; 5. Dimension; 6. Bookform, extent; 7. Text; 8. Scribe/Hand; 9. Catalogue (here often the LDAB).
Malcomlm Choat then went on with a similar paper, focusing on Coptic miniature codices. One could see that there was a dominance of such codices used for sacred texts, but there were other items as well (like notebooks, writing exercises, magic rituals, etc). Choat, personally, had started to work with the following rough categories in terms of the format:
1. Large format (200+ each side, roughly square)
2. Twice as high (200+) as broad
3. "Aberrants" (much higher than broad, and using Turner's designation)
4. c. 120-160 mm and roughly square
5. Miniature (less than 100 mm both sides, arbitrary number, but actually miniature)
Ann-Marie Luijenduijk, in her paper, focused on one miniature codex in the Princeton library, apparently it was a divination book with Christian oracles. One thing that was clear was the enthusiasm with which Luijenduijk spoke about her "petit book". This enthusiasm and "wow"-feeling is probably the impression of most of us when we encounter a miniature codex for the first time in real life (not on an enlarged image). Maybe this very "wow-feeling" is part of the answer of the significance of the miniature codex.
Thus, Kraus went on to present a number of examples of Greek miniature codices, and the kind of data included in his prelliminary list (in various level of detail): 1. Publication, ed.pr., inv. no.; 2. Material; 3. Date; 4. Provenance; 5. Dimension; 6. Bookform, extent; 7. Text; 8. Scribe/Hand; 9. Catalogue (here often the LDAB).
Malcomlm Choat then went on with a similar paper, focusing on Coptic miniature codices. One could see that there was a dominance of such codices used for sacred texts, but there were other items as well (like notebooks, writing exercises, magic rituals, etc). Choat, personally, had started to work with the following rough categories in terms of the format:
1. Large format (200+ each side, roughly square)
2. Twice as high (200+) as broad
3. "Aberrants" (much higher than broad, and using Turner's designation)
4. c. 120-160 mm and roughly square
5. Miniature (less than 100 mm both sides, arbitrary number, but actually miniature)
Ann-Marie Luijenduijk, in her paper, focused on one miniature codex in the Princeton library, apparently it was a divination book with Christian oracles. One thing that was clear was the enthusiasm with which Luijenduijk spoke about her "petit book". This enthusiasm and "wow"-feeling is probably the impression of most of us when we encounter a miniature codex for the first time in real life (not on an enlarged image). Maybe this very "wow-feeling" is part of the answer of the significance of the miniature codex.
SBL in San Diego II: IGNTP and Petersen Sessions
I am now at the SBL meetings in San Diego. I have spent a rather large part of the day with textual critics.
The IGNTP session this morning was a packout. The IGNTP have decided to hold part of their meeting in public each year and then to go into closed committee meeting. I’d guess that there were 12 or 13 different editorial reports given in 90 minutes. The committee meeting was the first one since the British and American Committees reconstituted themselves into a single committee.
The session in memory of William L. Petersen was a panel session chaired by AnneMarie Luijendijk. The panel consisted of myself, Ulrich Schmid, Lucas van Rompay, and Bart Ehrman.
I began with reflections on Bill’s skill as a reviewer and moved from there to a type of book review, namely a critique of the 2002 book Thomas and Tatian by Nicholas Perrin, which argues that the Gospel of Thomas was originally written in Syriac and contains numerous Syriac catchwords.
Ulrich spoke about a manuscript (a Middle Dutch Harmony of the Gospels from Utrecht) which was lost during WWII. The time and place when it appears to have gone missing were towards the end of the war in Bonn. Ulrich had done lots of archive work, but if the manuscript does still exist it is likely to have been taken home by an Allied serviceman and might remain in the possession of the family. It would be great if there were a volunteer interested in military history to chase up in detail the questions of which troops and personnel were in Bonn at the time to see if the manuscript can yet be located.
Lucas spoke about Bill’s interests in Romanos the Melodist, Efrem, and the Diatessaron. One matter he raised was the likelihood that Efrem’s influence on Romanos was not direct.
Bart discussed Papyrus Egerton 2, comparing it with Gospel harmonies of the second century, touching on matters such as the Gospel of the Ebionites, the Dura fragment, the Diatessaron, Irenaeus, and Epiphanius.
The IGNTP session this morning was a packout. The IGNTP have decided to hold part of their meeting in public each year and then to go into closed committee meeting. I’d guess that there were 12 or 13 different editorial reports given in 90 minutes. The committee meeting was the first one since the British and American Committees reconstituted themselves into a single committee.
The session in memory of William L. Petersen was a panel session chaired by AnneMarie Luijendijk. The panel consisted of myself, Ulrich Schmid, Lucas van Rompay, and Bart Ehrman.
I began with reflections on Bill’s skill as a reviewer and moved from there to a type of book review, namely a critique of the 2002 book Thomas and Tatian by Nicholas Perrin, which argues that the Gospel of Thomas was originally written in Syriac and contains numerous Syriac catchwords.
Ulrich spoke about a manuscript (a Middle Dutch Harmony of the Gospels from Utrecht) which was lost during WWII. The time and place when it appears to have gone missing were towards the end of the war in Bonn. Ulrich had done lots of archive work, but if the manuscript does still exist it is likely to have been taken home by an Allied serviceman and might remain in the possession of the family. It would be great if there were a volunteer interested in military history to chase up in detail the questions of which troops and personnel were in Bonn at the time to see if the manuscript can yet be located.
Lucas spoke about Bill’s interests in Romanos the Melodist, Efrem, and the Diatessaron. One matter he raised was the likelihood that Efrem’s influence on Romanos was not direct.
Bart discussed Papyrus Egerton 2, comparing it with Gospel harmonies of the second century, touching on matters such as the Gospel of the Ebionites, the Dura fragment, the Diatessaron, Irenaeus, and Epiphanius.
SBL in San Diego I - First Session: Towards GNT5
On Friday I arrived well in San Diego and went to bed after 28 hours of traveling, and being awake a few extra hours in order to cope with the jet lag. During the afternoon I found my hotel and went down with a shuttle to the huge San Diego convention center in order to register. Then I met some friends, but I soon went home to sleep.
Saturday morning I went to my first session, "Towards a Fifth Edition of the UBS GNT." In the panel was Jan Bühner (presiding), Roger Omansson, Florian Voss, Ulrich Schmid (in place of Klaus Wachtel). One of the important rationales for this session was the wish not only to lay out the plans for the fifth edition, but also to ask the gathered specialists and/or users for advice on various levels, e.g. in relation to the choice of variant units to include, and what to do with the famous and often criticized letter rating system (A-D).
Bühner first gave some history and introduction of the UBS GNT editions. Already in the mid-50s Eugene Nida had the idea to make a manual edition for Bible translators. After the INTF in Münster was founded in 1959, the work, as we know, became closely connected to the scholarly work undertaken at this institute.
Roger Omansson then continued to sketch in more detail the history and development of the various editions, from the first edition that appeared in 1966 up to the fourth edition. For that fourth edition more manuscripts were cited than ever, and 293 variant units were dropped and 284 were added, on the basis of what was of relevance for Bible translators (and which involved significance in meaning), among some other factors. One way that this significance in meaning was judged was the close examination of 15 actual translations in order to see what variant units really affected the choice of the translators (including also the observation of what textual notes appeared).
Later on Ulrich Schmid read out a paper written by Klaus Wachtel of the INTF, who had problems with his flight connection. Among other things, Wachtel described the basis for the selection of witnesses for the GNT4, for which was the Aland categories I-V where used. For the fifth edition, this has now changed altogether as a result of the work of the institute in Münster, as reflected in the TuT series, and development of newer methods (like the CBGM) which allow for a more correct application of the "codex eliminatio", and the focus on significant witnesses representing a broad spectrum of witnesses and crucial points in the transmission history. Among examples, Wachtel mentioned that 322 is a copy of 323 (and will thus be eliminated); 2464 is a late and bad representative of the Byzantine text; manuscripts 468, 424, 617. 1448 and 429 suffice to represent the Harclean group, etc.
One particular feature that was dwelt upon during the session both in the presentation and the subsequent discussion was the letter rating system. Nida had wanted this system for translators that were not necessarily scholars. This is even more true today, as Omansson pointed out, i.e. many translators have never had a course of textual criticism. So what do the translators think now? Do they need the rating system. Some colleagues say "abandon", other "retain". Many translators read the Greek New Testament, but at the same time (or just because of that) they need a guide, especially when approaching the Nestle-Aland edition. But what about the optimism of the ratings? It may create an impression of a secure text, more than it is. In conclusion: if the rating system is to be retained it has to be revised.
In the discussion, I of course took the opportunity to mention (and promote) my own experiment with a rating system in my edition of Jude, where I use different symbols and definitions. To summarize them briefly:
e+i: external evidence and internal evidence unequivocally support the adapted reading
e [greater than-sign] i: external evidence supports the adapted reading, whereas internal reading is ambiguous
e [smaller than-sign] i: internal evidence unequivocally supports a reading whereas external evidence is ambiguous
e=i external and internal evidence are balanced, or, alternatively, external evidence favors one variant reading, internal evidence another.
I suggested that this type of rating system invites the user to also grapple with the state of the evidence and the concept of "external" and "internal" evidence, which are the criteria used also in the reasoned ecclectic approach of the UBS committee. Omansson apparently showed interest, so I presented him with two copies of my book (he asked for one to be reviewed in the Bible Translator).
Saturday morning I went to my first session, "Towards a Fifth Edition of the UBS GNT." In the panel was Jan Bühner (presiding), Roger Omansson, Florian Voss, Ulrich Schmid (in place of Klaus Wachtel). One of the important rationales for this session was the wish not only to lay out the plans for the fifth edition, but also to ask the gathered specialists and/or users for advice on various levels, e.g. in relation to the choice of variant units to include, and what to do with the famous and often criticized letter rating system (A-D).
Bühner first gave some history and introduction of the UBS GNT editions. Already in the mid-50s Eugene Nida had the idea to make a manual edition for Bible translators. After the INTF in Münster was founded in 1959, the work, as we know, became closely connected to the scholarly work undertaken at this institute.
Roger Omansson then continued to sketch in more detail the history and development of the various editions, from the first edition that appeared in 1966 up to the fourth edition. For that fourth edition more manuscripts were cited than ever, and 293 variant units were dropped and 284 were added, on the basis of what was of relevance for Bible translators (and which involved significance in meaning), among some other factors. One way that this significance in meaning was judged was the close examination of 15 actual translations in order to see what variant units really affected the choice of the translators (including also the observation of what textual notes appeared).
Later on Ulrich Schmid read out a paper written by Klaus Wachtel of the INTF, who had problems with his flight connection. Among other things, Wachtel described the basis for the selection of witnesses for the GNT4, for which was the Aland categories I-V where used. For the fifth edition, this has now changed altogether as a result of the work of the institute in Münster, as reflected in the TuT series, and development of newer methods (like the CBGM) which allow for a more correct application of the "codex eliminatio", and the focus on significant witnesses representing a broad spectrum of witnesses and crucial points in the transmission history. Among examples, Wachtel mentioned that 322 is a copy of 323 (and will thus be eliminated); 2464 is a late and bad representative of the Byzantine text; manuscripts 468, 424, 617. 1448 and 429 suffice to represent the Harclean group, etc.
One particular feature that was dwelt upon during the session both in the presentation and the subsequent discussion was the letter rating system. Nida had wanted this system for translators that were not necessarily scholars. This is even more true today, as Omansson pointed out, i.e. many translators have never had a course of textual criticism. So what do the translators think now? Do they need the rating system. Some colleagues say "abandon", other "retain". Many translators read the Greek New Testament, but at the same time (or just because of that) they need a guide, especially when approaching the Nestle-Aland edition. But what about the optimism of the ratings? It may create an impression of a secure text, more than it is. In conclusion: if the rating system is to be retained it has to be revised.
In the discussion, I of course took the opportunity to mention (and promote) my own experiment with a rating system in my edition of Jude, where I use different symbols and definitions. To summarize them briefly:
e+i: external evidence and internal evidence unequivocally support the adapted reading
e [greater than-sign] i: external evidence supports the adapted reading, whereas internal reading is ambiguous
e [smaller than-sign] i: internal evidence unequivocally supports a reading whereas external evidence is ambiguous
e=i external and internal evidence are balanced, or, alternatively, external evidence favors one variant reading, internal evidence another.
I suggested that this type of rating system invites the user to also grapple with the state of the evidence and the concept of "external" and "internal" evidence, which are the criteria used also in the reasoned ecclectic approach of the UBS committee. Omansson apparently showed interest, so I presented him with two copies of my book (he asked for one to be reviewed in the Bible Translator).
Thursday, November 15, 2007
ETC Lunch at SBL
Our ETC Society of Biblical Literature lunch will be held on Monday, 19 November. Interested persons can congregate after the "Mark" session (9:00-11:30am in Salon 3 - MM). There is a great deal of TC at this year's conference, and I should guess that we will have much to discuss. We will have to eat quickly as some of us are presenting in the afternoon.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Lane's Arabic Lexicon goes online
Thanks are due to David Instone-Brewer for putting Lane's massive 8-volume Arabic Lexicon online here.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)