04-17-2004, 09:53 PM
shlomo Yuri,
From my greeting you can tell that I belong to the Western Aramaic Tradition. The Peshitto Text that I have and the Peshitta Text that Paul has are the same. The Khabouris from the 5th Century is the same as Peshitto/a. Everyone knows that in Western Aramaic we added a few books, and some passages that are not found in the Peshitta, because of Hellenization forces, but even in the Peshitto the parts that were added have been indicated in between brackets.
In regards to "Tetraeuangelium", it actually confirms that the Peshitta is the same as it was before (Here's a quote from its introduction):
"Many years ago the late Philip Edward Pusey, son of the well-known Professor of Hebrew in the University of Oxford, began to collate ancient MSS. of the Peshitto, in order to test the accuracy of the printed Text, and to collect materials for a revision of it. The object of his researches was to discover whether the traditional text, first published by Widmanstadt, and reproduced with little variation by subsequent editors, might reasonably be considered to represent that of the ancient Syriac Church. In pursuit of this design he made careful collations of a large number of MSS., for the most part very ancient and valuable copies: some he collated throughout, others he examined in important passages. After his death, his collations were continued by the present writer; and while the work has progressed somewhat slowly, for various reasons, the critical materials have increased in amount, and the plan of the work has outgrown Pusey's original design.
The labours of my predecessor and of myself have resulted in certain definite conclusions. We have discovered the answer to the inquiry which suggested there researches. We have found that the text of the Editio Princeps of 1555 is amlost identical with that current at the time when our MSS. were written. We can demonstrate that the Peshitto Version of the Gospels has not been corrupted in later times; but, on the contrary, that whatsoever variations it exhibits from the Greek, date from a most remote antiquity. Our authorities are products of both the great schools of Syriac Christianity, while our most ancient copies connect our readings with those of the undivided Syriac Church.
But while the collations made tend chiefly to the support of the traditional text of the Peshitto, in a certain number of passages we are able to correct it, where the MSS. used by Widmanstadt were apparently defective or corrupted. In these places the results of our collations are highly satisfactory; for it is found that the ancient codices, and of both schools, agree so remarkably, that seldom is the true reading left doubtful.
...."
poosh bashlomo,
keefa-moroon
yuku Wrote:In any case, what you say above is incorrect, sorry. :(
All existing Peshitta manuscripts don't really agree. There are quite a few variations among them, as Pusey/Gwilliam edition's textual apparatus indicates.
Pusey, Phillip E., and Gwilliam, George H., eds., 1901. Tetraeuangelium sanctum juxta simplicem syrorum versionem ad fidem codicum, massorae, editionum denuo recognitum. Oxford: Clarendon.
From my greeting you can tell that I belong to the Western Aramaic Tradition. The Peshitto Text that I have and the Peshitta Text that Paul has are the same. The Khabouris from the 5th Century is the same as Peshitto/a. Everyone knows that in Western Aramaic we added a few books, and some passages that are not found in the Peshitta, because of Hellenization forces, but even in the Peshitto the parts that were added have been indicated in between brackets.
In regards to "Tetraeuangelium", it actually confirms that the Peshitta is the same as it was before (Here's a quote from its introduction):
"Many years ago the late Philip Edward Pusey, son of the well-known Professor of Hebrew in the University of Oxford, began to collate ancient MSS. of the Peshitto, in order to test the accuracy of the printed Text, and to collect materials for a revision of it. The object of his researches was to discover whether the traditional text, first published by Widmanstadt, and reproduced with little variation by subsequent editors, might reasonably be considered to represent that of the ancient Syriac Church. In pursuit of this design he made careful collations of a large number of MSS., for the most part very ancient and valuable copies: some he collated throughout, others he examined in important passages. After his death, his collations were continued by the present writer; and while the work has progressed somewhat slowly, for various reasons, the critical materials have increased in amount, and the plan of the work has outgrown Pusey's original design.
The labours of my predecessor and of myself have resulted in certain definite conclusions. We have discovered the answer to the inquiry which suggested there researches. We have found that the text of the Editio Princeps of 1555 is amlost identical with that current at the time when our MSS. were written. We can demonstrate that the Peshitto Version of the Gospels has not been corrupted in later times; but, on the contrary, that whatsoever variations it exhibits from the Greek, date from a most remote antiquity. Our authorities are products of both the great schools of Syriac Christianity, while our most ancient copies connect our readings with those of the undivided Syriac Church.
But while the collations made tend chiefly to the support of the traditional text of the Peshitto, in a certain number of passages we are able to correct it, where the MSS. used by Widmanstadt were apparently defective or corrupted. In these places the results of our collations are highly satisfactory; for it is found that the ancient codices, and of both schools, agree so remarkably, that seldom is the true reading left doubtful.
...."
poosh bashlomo,
keefa-moroon